ArticleArthroplasty today2017
Midterm analysis of the seleXys cup with ceramic inlay.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCeramic-on-ceramic (CoC) articulations in total hip replacement (THR) has been accepted as giving reliable mid-term results; however recent studies have reported higher revision rates of some implants. This study analyses the nationwide results of the seleXys TPS cup and the Bionit2 liner (Mathys, Bettlach, Switzerland) with respect to implant survival, cause for revision and mortality rates compared to other CoC articulations using the same stem.
methodsUtilising the New Zealand Joint Registry, we compared the seleXys TPS cup with Bionit2 liner used with an uncemented Twinsys femoral stem to every other uncemented CoC THR using the same stem. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the effects of patient age, gender, ASA score and implant head size on these rates.
resultsBetween 2006 and 2013 a total of 1035 seleXys THRs were performed on 862 patients. The comparison group had 375 THRs on 280 patients. There were 77 revisions (1.4/100 component years) in the study group and two in the comparison group (0.12/100 component years). Overall hazards ratio for revision was 12.22 times higher and female gender was associated with an increased risk (hazards ratio 1.77). Causes for revision were disturbing noises (23.4%), acetabular loosening (20.8%), and fracture of the liner (18.2%). Mortality rates were not significantly different (
conclusionsThe seleXys TPS cup with the Bionit2 ceramic inlay coupling has an unacceptably high failure rate. We recommend avoiding this implant coupling and would advise that patients treated with this implant need close clinical and radiological follow-up.
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.