Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25399966›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2015

Short-term survival of the trabecular metal cup is similar to that of standard cups used in acetabular revision surgery.

Maziar Mohaddes, Ola Rolfson, Johan Kärrholm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Carpal bone replacement using personalized 3D printed tantalum prosthesis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CORR InsightsClinical orthopaedics and related research · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maziar MohaddesDepartment of Orthopedics , Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg; the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Gothenburg , Sweden.
Ola Rolfson
Johan Kärrholm

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeThe use of trabecular metal (TM) cups in revision surgery has increased worldwide during the last decade. Since the introduction of the TM cup in Sweden in 2006, this design has gradually replaced other uncemented designs used in Sweden. According to data from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR) in 2012, one-third of all uncemented first-time cup revisions were performed using a TM cup. We compared the risk of reoperation and re-revision for TM cups and the 2 other most frequently used cup designs in acetabular revisions reported to the SHAR. The hypothesis was that the performance of TM cups is as good as that of established designs in the short term. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe study population consisted of 2,384 patients who underwent 2,460 revisions during the period 2006 through 2012. The most commonly used cup designs were the press-fit porous-coated cup (n = 870), the trabecular metal cup (n = 805), and the cemented all-polyethylene cup (n = 785). 54% of the patients were female, and the median age at index revision was 72 (19-95) years. Reoperation was defined as a second surgical intervention, and re-revision-meaning exchange or removal of the cup-was used as endpoint. The mean follow-up time was 3.3 (0-7) years.

resultsThere were 215 reoperations, 132 of which were re-revisions. The unadjusted and adjusted risk of reoperation or re-revision was not significantly different for the TM cup and the other 2 cup designs.

interpretationOur data support continued use of TM cups in acetabular revisions. Further follow-up is necessary to determine whether trabecular metal cups can reduce the re-revision rate in the long term, compared to the less costly porous press-fit and cemented designs.

Indexed as

Hip ProsthesisProsthesis FailureRegistriesAcetabulumAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArthritisArthroplasty, Replacement, HipCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMetalsMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, HipMetals

Identifiers

PMID25399966
PMCPMC4366676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.