ArticleInternational orthopaedics2012
Retention of a well-fixed acetabular component in the setting of acetabular osteolysis.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Massive Periacetabular Osteolysis Treated With Acetabular Cup Retention and Cemented Screw Fixation.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Isolated Liner Exchange and Bone Grafting for the Management of Periacetabular Osteolysis in Well-Fixed Cups with an Intact Locking Mechanism at Short-Term to Medium-Term Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2024Review
- The Diagnosis and Treatment of Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: An International Consensus Symposium.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe treatment strategy for pelvic osteolysis with a well-fixed acetabular component after total hip arthroplasty(THA) involves replacing the acetabular cup liner and femoral head, débriding osteolytic lesions, and grafting.
methodsWe investigated whether retention of a well-fixed acetabular component using the two-approach technique—the ilioinguinal approach combined with the posterolateral approach—was compatible with socket survival. Were viewed clinical and radiographic findings for 24 patients(24 hips) who had undergone acetabular revision arthroplasty of a well-fixed socket for progressive osteolysis. The surgical techniques used included osteolytic lesion débridement and bone grafting through the ilioinguinal approach,and replacement of the acetabular liner and femoral head through the posterolateral approach.
resultsThe mean duration of follow-up after revision was 2.3 (range 2.1–3.9) years. At follow-up evaluation, all acetabular components were well fixed and showed no evidence of loosening, osseous integration was apparent and there was no radiographic evidence that any lesions had progressed. No new osteolytic lesions were identified, and there were no clinical or radiographic complications.
conclusionsCurettage and bone grafting under direct vision, cup liner and femoral-head replacement because of progressive retroacetabular osteolysis and retention of well fixed components using the two-approach technique results in good osseous integration of lysis. Larger studies with longer follow-up periods are required to establish the longterm success of this technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.