Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27787383›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2016

Short-stem prostheses in primary total hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Shao-Chuan Huo, Fan Wang, Lu-Jue Dong, Wei Wei, Jing-Qi Zeng, Hong-Xing Huang, Qing-Min Han, Rui-Qi Duan

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shao-Chuan HuoGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Baiyun District Department of Orthopedics, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine Third Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Liwan District, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province, China.
Fan Wang
Lu-Jue Dong
Wei Wei
Jing-Qi Zeng
Hong-Xing Huang
Qing-Min Han
Rui-Qi Duan
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShort-stem (SS) prostheses require less resection of the femoral neck, produce a more physiological load pattern in the proximal femur, reduce stress shielding, and aid bone conservation and are, therefore, beneficial for young patients. Conventional cementless implants in total hip arthroplasty (THA) have shown excellent clinical results; however, it is unclear whether SS prostheses can obtain the same clinical and radiological outcomes. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate whether SS prostheses are superior to conventional implants after primary THA.

methodsWe reviewed the literature published up to June 2016 from PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to find relevant RCTs comparing SSs and conventional stems in primary THA. Quality assessment was performed by 2 independent reviewers. The RevMan 5.3 software program of the Cochrane Collaboration was used to analyze the data. Random- or fixed-effect models were used to calculate standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each comparison.

resultsSix RCTs involving 552 patients with 572 hips were identified. Strong evidence indicated that SS prostheses were more effective for reducing thigh pain than conventional implants (I = 46%, P = 0.002; risk ratio [RR], 95% CI 0.15, 0.04-0.49). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in Harris Hip Scores (I = 0%, P = 0.84; SMD, 95% CI 0.02, -0.15-0.18), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Scores (I = 0%, P = 0.35; SMD, 95% CI 0.09, -0.10-0.27), femoral offset of stem (I = 0%, P = 0.57; SMD, 95% CI 0.06, -0.16-0.29), and leg-length discrepancy (I = 79%, P = 0.88; SMD, 95% CI 0.04, -0.44-0.51).

conclusionSS prostheses achieve the same clinical and radiological outcomes as conventional implants, and were superior in terms of reducing thigh pain. But whether the postoperative thigh pain applied in 2nd-generation cementless prosthesis still needs further large-scale multicenter studies with longer follow-up to confirm.

Indexed as

Hip ProsthesisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicArthroplasty, Replacement, HipHumansProsthesis DesignTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID27787383
PMCPMC5089112
OpenAlexW2539475487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.