header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 7 Supple B | Pages 122 - 128
1 Jul 2020
Sodhi N Acuna A Etcheson J Mohamed N Davila I Ehiorobo JO Jones LC Delanois RE Mont MA

Aims

Earlier studies dealing with trends in the management of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) identified an increasing rate of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and a decreasing rate of joint-preserving procedures between 1992 and 2008. In an effort to assess new trends in the management of this condition, this study evaluated the annual trends of joint-preserving versus arthroplasties for patients aged < or > 50 years old, and the incidence of specific operative management techniques.

Methods

A total of 219,371 patients with ONFH were identified from a nationwide database between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2015. The mean age was 54 years (18 to 90) and 105,298 (48%) were female. The diagnosis was made using International Classification of Disease, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) procedure codes. The percentage of patients managed using each procedure during each year was calculated and compared between years. The trends in the use of the types of procedure were also evaluated.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_12 | Pages 47 - 47
1 Oct 2019
Sodhi N Etcheson J Mohamed N Davila I Ehiorobo JO Anis HK Jones LC Delanois RE Mont MA
Full Access

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to analyze trends in the surgical management of ON in recent years. Specifically, we evaluated the annual prevalences of: 1) joint preserving procedures (osteotomies and core decompression/grafts) and 2) joint non-preserving procedures (total hip arthroplasties [THAs], revision THAs, partial THAs) for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) between 2009 and 2016.

Background

A total of 406,239 ONFH patients who were treated between 2009 and 2016 were identified from a nationwide database. Treatment procedures were extracted using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM procedure codes. Annual rates of each of the above procedures were calculated and the trends in the procedure types were also evaluated. Chi-square tests were performed to compare the annual prevalence of each procedure. The mean annual prevalence over the 8-year study period was calculated for each procedure.