[A clinical radiological score for femoral head grafts : Establishment of the Tabea FK score to ensure the quality of human femoral head grafts].

INTRODUCTION

Transplantation of cancellous tissue from human femoral heads (FK) is an established method in the reconstruction of bony defects in orthopedic and trauma surgery. Standardized rating systems with respect to the morphological quality of this tissue are not available.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 91/105 patients who had been a regular, clinically-indicated surgery (arthroplasty of the hip joint) the respective femoral head (FK) was taken under standardized conditions. Using a checklist defined clinical and radiological criteria of FK are judged in terms of their quality (cysts, necrosis, calcification, deformities, osteoporosis) and divided by the Tabea FK score into three classes (best/middle/poor quality). This was followed by a blinded repeated scoring, now as macroscopic assessment of three sawed layers from the same femoral head. The femoral heads are examined by peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) and a standardized histological examination of the bony tissue. We evaluated the accordance of the Tabea FK score with complementary assessments by calculation of sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Femoral heads from 91/105 patients (ages: 68.4 ± 9.9 , n = 60 women, n = 31 men) were explanted and included in the study. The correlation between the primary radiologic clinical score (Tabea FK score) and the macroscopic second review of the sawn FK with respect to middle/best and poor/middle quality was classified as good (sensitivity 77% and 81%, respectively; specificity 76% and 84%, respectively). The correlation of histology and macroscopic second review was worse and in relation to discrimination of middle/best and poor/middle quality had a sensitivity of 85% and 54%, respectively, and a specificity of 66% and 97%, respectively. The pQCT showed a sensitivity of 82% only in discrimination of middle/best, while sensitivity in discrimination of poor/middle and poor/middle + best, respectively, was <10%.

DISCUSSION

The corresponding correlation between the primary and the second clinical score was evaluated as good. This emphasizes the long-standing skills of operationally active orthopedic surgeons to classify the quality of cancellous bone correctly already on the basis of X‑ray images and intraoperative findings. In this respect, the introduction of the Tabea FK score as a quality assurance tool in the routines of bone banks can be recommended.