Skip to main content
. 2022 Nov 2;9:1000073. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1000073

Table 2.

Baseline characteristics of the included studies.

First author Year Country Study design Stage of ONFH Groups Inventions Patients (Hips) Sex (M: F) Age (mean ± SD, years) Follow-up time (mean, months)
Algarni (25) 2018 Arabia Non-comparative study ARCO I, II Conservation Crutches 21 (33) 9:12 37.5 60
Churchill (26) 1991 UK Non-comparative study Ficat III Conservation Crutches 29 (35) 10:19 37.5 60
Fang (31) 2020 China Comparative study Ficat I, II Conservation Crutches 30 (41) 26:4 48.1 33.5
Surgery CD+ tantalum 30 (41) 26:4 44.2
Huang (27) 2020 China Non-comparative study ARCO I–IV Conservation Crutches 33 (66) 9:24 42.5 178.56
Koo (8) 1995 South Korea RCT Steinberg I–III Conservation Crutches 19 (19) 31:2 47 24–45
Surgery CD 18 (18)
Steinberg (32) 1990 USA Comparative study Steinberg I–III Conservation Crutches 55 (55) No No 24–48
Surgery CD 40 (40) 30:10 No
Sun (33) 2014 China Comparative study ARCO I–III Conservation Crutches 87 (127) 26:61 33 74.4
Surgery Bone graft 42 (72) 19:23 30.7 85.2
Tomaru (18) 2021 Japan Comparative study JIC A, B, C1, C2 conservation Crutches 33 (33) 2:31 35.7 104.4
Surgery CD 33 (33) 2:31 35.1 70.8
Vulpiani (28) 2012 Italy Non-comparative study ARCO I–III Conservation Crutches 36 (36) 23:13 48.9 24
Wiesmann (29) 1998 Germany Non-comparative study No Conservation Crutches 17 (24) 9:8 29.41 36.47
Wu (30) 2018 China Non-comparative study ARCO II Conservation Crutches 168 (202) 141:27 47.07 91
Stulberg (23) 1991 USA RCT Ficat Conservation Crutches 17 (26) No 38.6 ≥18
Surgery CD 19 (29)
Wang (34) 2005 China Comparative study ARCO I–III Conservation Crutches 23 (29) 20:3 39.8 25.2
Surgery CD+ bone graft 25 (28) 23:2 39.9 25.8
Neumayr (24) 2006 USA RCT Steinberg Conservation Crutches 21 (21) 11:10 26.41 80
Surgery CD 17 (17) 8:9 24.67