ReviewDer Orthopade2017
Acetabular defect classification in times of 3D imaging and patient-specific treatment protocols.
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 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Neglected traumatic hip dislocation: a systematic review of case reports and case series on management, outcomes, and complications.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Pooled it
- Acetabular Bone Defect Classifications in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Custom-Made Monoflange Acetabular Component for Revision Hip Arthroplasty in Paprosky Type IIIA Defect: A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Automated Acetabular Defect Reconstruction and Analysis for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Computational Modeling Study.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025Article
- Effect of segmental rim defect morphology on press-fit stability of the cementless acetabular cup: a finite element analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Preoperative Three-Dimensional Planning Using Computed Tomography Improves Screw Placement in Patients Undergoing Acetabular Revision Surgery.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Acetabular Defects in Revision Hip Arthroplasty Based on 3D Modeling: The Area Increase Ratio (Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Proximal femoral defect classifications in revision total hip arthroplasty from X-rays imaging to advanced 3D imaging: a narrative review.Annals of joint · 2024Review
- Advanced quantitative 3D imaging improves the reliability of the classification of acetabular defects.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Acetabular defect management and revision arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach.Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2022Article
- Reliability and validity test of a novel three-dimensional acetabular bone defect classification system aided with additive manufacturing.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Taking the Next Step in Personalised Orthopaedic Implantation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- 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
- Custom Made Monoflange Acetabular Components for the Treatment of Paprosky Type III Defects.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Decision/therapeutic algorithm for acetabular revisions.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Revision Arthroplasty Through the Direct Anterior Approach Using an Asymmetric Acetabular Component.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using the in situ referencing technique.Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2020Article
- Pelvic discontinuity in acetabular revisions: does CT scan overestimate it? A comparative study of diagnostic accuracy of 3D-modeling and traditional 3D CT scan.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2020Article
- Use of 3D modelling and 3D printing for the diagnostic process, decision making and preoperative planning of periprosthetic acetabular fractures.BMJ case reports · 2020Article
- A New Diagnostic Approach for Periprosthetic Acetabular Fractures Based on 3D Modeling: A Study Protocol.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parallel to the rising number of revision hip procedures, an increasing number of complex periprosthetic osseous defects can be expected. Stable long-term fixation of the revision implant remains the ultimate goal of the surgical protocol. Within this context, an elaborate preoperative planning process including anticipation of the periacetabular defect form and size and analysis of the remaining supporting osseous elements are essential. However, detection and evaluation of periacetabular bone defects using an unsystematic analysis of plain anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis is in many cases difficult. Therefore, periacetabular bone defect classification schemes such as the Paprosky system have been introduced that use standardized radiographic criteria to better anticipate the intraoperative reality. Recent studies were able to demonstrate that larger defects are often underestimated when using the Paprosky classification and that the intra- and interobserver reliability of the system is low. This makes it hard to compare results in terms of defects being studied. Novel software tools that are based on the analysis of CT data may provide an opportunity to overcome the limitations of native radiographic defect analysis. In the following article we discuss potential benefits of these novel instruments against the background of the obvious limitations of the currently used native radiographic defect analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28078371What 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.