2020
DOI: 10.1007/s00256-020-03572-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Developmental dysplasia of the hip: can contrast-enhanced MRI predict the development of avascular necrosis following surgery?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Benefit from MRI, it’s convenient for clinicians, regardless of experience level, subspecialty, or geographic origin, to assess the quality of hip reduction and predict surgical reduction of avascular necrosis (AVN). Magnetic resonance imaging provides a more reliable interpretation than standard X-rays and reduces radiation exposure [ 13 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Benefit from MRI, it’s convenient for clinicians, regardless of experience level, subspecialty, or geographic origin, to assess the quality of hip reduction and predict surgical reduction of avascular necrosis (AVN). Magnetic resonance imaging provides a more reliable interpretation than standard X-rays and reduces radiation exposure [ 13 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Haruno et al [17] suggested cut-off value of epiphyseal enhancement, which was less than 80%, exhibited a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 88.25% in the diagnosis of epiphyseal osteonecrosis after closed reduction of DDH using contrast-enhanced spica MRI. However, Nguyen et al [25] reported that neither of enhancement pattern nor percent enhancement predicted AVN on postoperative MRI. Considering transient ischemia of the proximal femoral epiphysis induced by hip abduction, we subjectively estimated global decreased enhancement when the nonenhancing area of the proximal femoral epiphysis was larger than 3/4 of the proximal femoral epiphysis area with loss of normal striated or speckled enhancement.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After reading the full text of the remaining 61 studies, three reviews and four meta-analysis studies were excluded, 13 studies were excluded because of missing or fuzzy data, 4 studies with duplicate data were excluded, 15 studies with an age of reduction ≥3 years old were excluded, and 8 studies involving only one treatment method were excluded. Finally, 14 articles [15,17,[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] were included. The literature retrieval process is illustrated in Fig.…”
Section: Study Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%