Background Intra-articular injections containing a corticosteroid are used frequently, and periprosthetic joint infection is a serious complication after total joint arthroplasty. There is debate regarding whether intraarticular corticosteroid injections before arthroplasty increase periprosthetic joint infection after surgery. Questions/purposes (1) Does a previous intra-articular corticosteroid injection increase the odds of infection after subsequent hip or knee arthroplasty? (2) Does this risk vary based on how soon before the arthroplasty (such as less than 3 months before surgery) the injection is administered?Methods Using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception to July 2021, we searched for comparative studies in English on patients who received intra-articular corticosteroid injections before arthroplasty and that tracked the frequency of infection after arthroplasty. We extracted data on the risk of infection after subsequent joint arthroplasty. The keywords included "corticosteroid," "steroid," "arthroplasty," "knee replacement," and "hip replacement." Eleven retrospective, comparative studies from four countries were included, of which 10 reported the specific diagnosis criteria and oneThe institution of one or more of the authors (QZ) has received, during the study period, funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong (2015A030313353). The institution of one or more of the authors (CZ) has received, during the study period, funding from the Research Project of Innovating to Strengthen the First Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (2019IIT06). Each author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

BackgroundAlthough the risk factors associated with osteonecrosis of femoral head (ONFH) after internal fixation of femoral neck fracture (IFFNF) have been frequently reported, the results remain controversial. Therefore, its related risk factors were systematically evaluated and meta-classified in this study.MethodsLiterature on risk factors of ONFH caused by IFFNF was retrieved in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library due June 2019. Review Manager 5.3 software was applied to data synthesis, and Stata 13.0 software was adopted for analyses of publication bias and sensitivity.ResultsA total of 17 case-control studies with 2065 patients were included. The risk of ONFH after IF was 0.40-fold higher in patients with Garden III-IV FNF than that in patients with Garden I-II (OR: 0.40, 95%CI: 0.29–0.55). The risk of OFNH with retained IF was uplifted by 0.04 times (OR: 0.04, 95%CI: 0.02–0.07). There was nonsignificant relationship between gender and ONFH after IFFNF (OR: 1.27, 95%CI: 0.84–1.94). Moreover, ONFH after IFFNF presented no association with age (OR:1.66, 95%CI: 0.89–3.11), injury-operation interval (OR:1.29, 95%CI: 0.82–2.04), fracture reduction mode (OR:1.98, 95%CI: 0.92–4.26), preoperative traction (OR:1.69, 95%CI: 0.29–9.98) and mechanism of injury (OR:0.53, 95%CI: 0.06–4.83). Egger’s and Begg’s tests indicated a publication bias (P = 0.001).ConclusionIt was demonstrated that Garden classification and retained IF were important influencing factors of ONFH after IFFNF. Gender, age, injury-operation interval, fracture reduction mode, preoperative traction and the mechanism of ONFH were irrelevant to the complication.

No abstract

Aims The aim of this study was to report the medium-term outcomes of impaction bone allograft and fibular grafting for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) and to define the optimal indications. Methods A total of 67 patients (77 hips) with ONFH were enrolled in a single centre retrospective review. Success of the procedure was assessed using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and rate of revision to total hip arthroplasty (THA). Risk factors were studied, including age, aetiology, duration of hip pain, as well as two classification systems (Association Research Circulation Osseous (ARCO) and Japanese Investigation Committee (JIC) systems). Results After a mean follow-up period of 8.61 years (SD 1.45), 81.3% (52/64) of enrolled cases had a good or excellent HHS at latest follow-up (declining to 76.0% (38/50) for those with more than eight years of follow-up). Overall survival was 92.1% at eight years’ follow-up (95% CI 83.2% to 96.4%). A total of 12 hips (19.0%) failed (reoperation or HHS < 70 points) at final follow-up. Rate of success was adversely affected by increasing age, duration of pain, and more severe disease as measured using the ARCO and JIC classifications, but not by aetiology of the ONFH. Conclusion We report favourable medium-term results of this procedure. Best outcomes can be expected in patients matching the following indications: younger than 40 years; less 12-month hip pain before surgery; femoral head collapse being less than 2 mm; and integrated lateral wall of femoral head. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7):838–844.