ArticleActa orthopaedica2017
Outcome in design-specific comparisons between highly crosslinked and conventional polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Slightly reduced early subsidence with similar outcomes and complications rate in collared stems - A systematic review of randomized clinical trials.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Review
- National Registry Data Analysis on a Unique Highly-Crosslinked Polyethylene for Total Hip Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2023Article
- A Multi-factor Analysis of Revision in Total Hip Replacement Using the Collarless-Polished-Tapered Stems with Different Cups.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- Global diversity in bearings in primary THA.EFORT open reviews · 2020Review
- Article
- Article
- The benefits of collaboration: the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association.EFORT open reviews · 2019Review
- An international comparison of THA patients, implants, techniques, and survivorship in Sweden, Australia, and the United States.Acta orthopaedica · 2019Article
- Homogeneity in prediction of survival probabilities for subcategories of hipprosthesis data: the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association, 2000-2013.Clinical epidemiology · 2019Article
- International registry collaboration and statistical approaches.Acta orthopaedica · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose - Most registry studies regarding highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) have focused on the overall revision risk. We compared the risk of cup and/or liner revision for specific cup and liner designs made of either XLPE or conventional polyethylene (CPE), regarding revision for any reason and revision due to aseptic loosening and/or osteolysis. Patients and methods - Using the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database, we identified cup and liner designs where either XLPE or CPE had been used in more than 500 THAs performed for primary hip osteoarthritis. We assessed risk of revision for any reason and for aseptic loosening using Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, femoral head material and size, surgical approach, stem fixation, and presence of hydroxyapatite coating (uncemented cups). Results - The CPE version of the ZCA cup had a risk of revision for any reason similar to that of the XLPE version (p = 0.09), but showed a 6-fold higher risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The CPE version of the Reflection All Poly cup had an 8-fold elevated risk of revision for any reason (p < 0.001) and a 5-fold increased risk of revision for aseptic loosening (p < 0.001). The Charnley Elite Ogee/Marathon cup and the Trilogy cup did not show such differences. Interpretation - Whether XLPE has any advantage over CPE regarding revision risk may depend on the properties of the polyethylene materials being compared, as well as the respective cup designs, fixation type, and follow-up times. Further research is needed to elucidate how cup design factors interact with polyethylene type to affect the risk of revision.
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.