Tradewind

Methods: 60 patients with avascular necrosis of the femoral head in our hospital were randomly divided into control group and observation group, 30 cases in each group. The control group was treated with ESWT alone, while the experimental group was treated with ESWT combined with core decompression. The Harris system score and therapeutic effect were compared between the two groups before and after operation, There was no significant difference (P > 0.05); Harris score of the control group was lower than that of the experimental group at 6 and 12 months after operation, the difference was significant (P < 0.05); the effective rate of the control group (73.3%) was lower than that of the experimental group (93.3%), the difference was significant (P < 0.05)

Methods: 60 patients with avascular necrosis of the femoral head in our hospital were randomly divided into control group and observation group, 30 cases in each group. The control group was treated with ESWT alone, while the experimental group was treated with ESWT combined with core decompression. The Harris system score and therapeutic effect were compared between the two groups before and after operation, There was no significant difference (P > 0.05); Harris score of the control group was lower than that of the experimental group at 6 and 12 months after operation, the difference was significant (P < 0.05); the effective rate of the control group (73.3%) was lower than that of the experimental group (93.3%), the difference was significant (P < 0.05)

Methods: 60 patients with avascular necrosis of the femoral head in our hospital were randomly divided into control group and observation group, 30 cases in each group. The control group was treated with ESWT alone, while the experimental group was treated with ESWT combined with core decompression. The Harris system score and therapeutic effect were compared between the two groups before and after operation, There was no significant difference (P > 0.05); Harris score of the control group was lower than that of the experimental group at 6 and 12 months after operation, the difference was significant (P < 0.05); the effective rate of the control group (73.3%) was lower than that of the experimental group (93.3%), the difference was significant (P < 0.05)