SynthesisChinese medical journal2015
Ceramic on Ceramic or Ceramic-on-polyethylene for Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Studies.
Synthesis in Chinese medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Ceramic-on-ceramicJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024Article
- Head, acetabular liner composition, and rate of revision and wear in total hip arthroplasty: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Higher risk of 2-year cup revision of ceramic-on-ceramic versus ceramic-on-polyethylene bearing: analysis of 33,454 primary press-fit total hip arthroplasties registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI).Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy · 2023Article
- Revision in Ceramic-on-Ceramic and Ceramic-on-Polyethylene Bearing in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty with Press-fit Cups: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Different Methodological Study Designs.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2022Review
- The Wear Rate and Survivorship in Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Third-generation Ceramic Head on a Conventional Polyethylene Liner: A Minimum of 15-year Follow-up.Hip & pelvis · 2022Article
- Ceramic-on-ceramic versus ceramic-on-polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: a comparative study at a minimum of 13 years follow-up.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- [Tribology in hip arthroplasty : Benefits of different materials].Der Orthopade · 2021Review
- Ceramic-on-ceramicWorld journal of orthopedics · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWear debris of polyethylene has become a restraining factor of the durability for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Ceramic on ceramic (COC) has better wear resistance while the squeaking sound and prosthesis fracture are of concern. It is still a controversy that bearing couples are better for THA.
methodsWe performed a systematic review of all English articles identified from PubMed (1966-), Embase (1980-) and the Cochrane Library. Clinical outcomes, complications, revision rates, and radiographic outcomes of COC-THA and ceramic on polyethylene (COP)-THA were compared and evaluated.
resultsEight prospective randomized trials enrolling a total of 1508 patients and 1702 THA surgeries were identified. Our results demonstrated the prosthesis fracture and the squeaking sound is significantly higher in COC group and higher wear rate of the COP. Hip function, loosening rate, dislocation rate, revision rate, and the osteolysis rate were comparable between two groups. According to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system assessment, the strength of evidence was high for prosthesis fracture, dislocation, osteolysis, and moderate for radiolucent line or loosening, hip noise, and revision.
conclusionsUp to now, there is insufficient evidence to identify any clinical advantage of COC compared with COP. Longer follow-up of larger randomized trial is needed to clarify the outcomes.
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.