Observational studyHip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy2018
Mid-term results of revision total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented modular femoral component.
Observational study in Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Femoral revision in total hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular stem: clinical and radiological results with a 8-year follow-up.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Aseptic Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty With a Single Modular Femoral Stem and a Modified Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy-Treatment Assessment With the Forgotten Joint Score-12.Arthroplasty today · 2022Article
- Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention for Hip Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Analysis of Implant Survival after Cure of Infection.Journal of bone and joint infection · 2020Article
- Promising results of revision total hip arthroplasty using a hexagonal, modular, tapered stem in cases of aseptic loosening.PloS one · 2020Article
- Distal fixation stems for revision of total hip replacement.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDuring revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), the surgeon commonly faces deficient proximal femoral bone. In this situation, distal fixation of the prosthesis is required. The aim of the current retrospective study is to assess the clinical and radiographic mid-term outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty using a modular uncemented, tapered, grit-blasted, distal straight stem system.
methodsThis retrospective study included 70 femoral revisions that were performed in 67 patients using the device of interest. All patients were operated on via an extended trochanteric osteotomy. 60 revisions were performed as 1-stage (12 infected) and 10 as 2-stage (all infected) revisions. At 3 months postoperatively and at final follow-up, patients were assessed radiographically for the presence of osteolysis and for distal integration.
resultsThe mean follow-up time was 4.3 (2.0-7.6) years. 4 patients had a removal of at least 1 prosthetic component. Stem survival for any reason was 92% after 5 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 83%-100%). With aseptic loosening of the stem as the endpoint of interest, survival after 5 years was 96% (95% CI, 88%-100%). A postoperative subsidence rate of 14.7% was found. No perioperative femoral fractures were found in the current patient series.
conclusionsThis study showed excellent mid-term survival and good clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients who had undergone revision THA with a modular uncemented, tapered, straight design.
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.