ReviewDer Orthopade2017
[Endoprostheses in the elderly : Biomaterials, implant selection and fixation technique].
Review in Der Orthopade, 2017. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitamin E-blended versus conventional polyethylene liners in prostheses : Prospective, randomized trial with 3-year follow-up.Der Orthopade · 2020Trial
- [Total hip arthroplasty in young patients : Bearings and custom-made prostheses].Der Orthopade · 2019Review
- [Characteristics of elective hip replacement in the elderly].Der Orthopade · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The replacement of hip and knee joints is one of the greatest success stories in orthopedics. Due to continuous improvement of biomaterials and implant design, patient-associated problems are now mostly multifactorial and only rarely caused by the implant. Abrasion was significantly reduced by the introduction of highly cross-linked polyethylene (PE), antioxidant stabilized PE, new ceramics and the development of ceramic and protective surfaces. It is assumed that further reduction of frictional resistance will not lead to a significantly better clinical result: however, the problem of periprosthetic infections and implant-related incompatibility is still unsolved and remains challenging for biomaterial research. For the knee joint PE will be irreplaceable for joint articulation even in the future due to the contact situation. Mobile bearings and fixed bearings are two established successful philosophies, which have shown comparably good clinical results. For the hip joint, it is forecasted that ceramic-on-ceramic will be the system of the future if the correct positioning and mounting of the components can be solved so that the problems, such as development of noise and breakage can be reduced to a minimum. An in-depth understanding and detailed knowledge of the biomaterials by the surgeon can prevent implant-related problems. For elderly patients it is assumed that the economic burden on the public healthcare system will have the strongest impact on implant selection.
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.