Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29344706›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2018

Long-term follow-up of 1217 consecutive short-stem total hip arthroplasty (THA): a retrospective single-center experience.

H Wacha, G Domsel, E Herrmann

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Long-term follow-up of a low profile, coated, press-fit cup: the trabeculae oriented pattern (T.O.P.) acetabular system.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Comparison of Bone Remodeling Between Collum Femoris-Preserving Stems and Ribbed Stems in 1-Stage Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H WachaDepartment of Surgery, Hospital zum Heiligen Geist, Academic Hospital of the Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. h.wacha@t-online.de.
G DomselDepartment of Surgery, Hospital zum Heiligen Geist, Academic Hospital of the Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
E HerrmannInstitute of Biostatistics and Mathematical Modeling, Goethe University Frankfurt/M, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn arthroplasty registry in Germany has been recently established but long-term results for most short-stem innovations are missing. Short-stem hip arthroplasty is usually indicated in young active patients. Our indication was extended to older age groups, femoral neck fractures (FNF), and dysplasia. We evaluated all total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in this population with a collum femoris preserving stem (CFP) performed from 2003 to 2013.

methodsA consecutive cohort of 1217 CFP THAs with a mean age of 68.7 years was followed retrospectively for a median of 4.8 years (patient follow-up interquartile range from 3.0 to 6.9 years). A questionnaire, which we used in two previous studies, was answered by 89.15% of patients and included information regarding complaints, grade of satisfaction, re-operations, and dislocation. Of the 1217 patients, 77 had died. Survival of the stem and the cup was assessed using a competing risks approach according to an Aalen-Johanson estimator with revision for septic or aseptic loosening or death as a competing endpoint.

resultsOf the patients who answered the questionnaire, 92.5% had no complaints related to the procedures. In all 1217 patients, there were 43 revisions (4.2%) as follows: stem and cup revisions due to aseptic loosening of the stem (n = 10), infections (n = 6), pain (n = 4), or trauma (n = 3); cup revisions due to aseptic loosening (n = 3), dislocation (n = 5), and offset revisions (n = 12). Survivorship was 96% for the stem and 99% for the cup 9 years postoperatively. Statistical analysis confirmed a higher risk for revision in patients with a younger age (p = 0.033), male sex (p = 0.040), dysplasia (p = 0.032), and undersized or extra-large stems for stem revisions (p = 0.001) and female sex (p = 0.036) for cup revisions. FNF (p > 0.20) and age ≥ 80 years (p = 0.114) had no higher risk for loosening of the stem. Our data is also compared with the current literature, especially with the available CFP studies.

conclusionThe survival rate of the CFP stem was as high as 96% after 9 years of followup which compares well-to-previously published long-term survival rates. There is no higher risk for revision in patients 80 years old or older and in cases with femoral neck fractures. The CFP preserves also allowed using standard stems in the rare cases of revision.

Indexed as

Hip ProsthesisAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, HipFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGermanyHumansMalePatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeRetrospectiveShort stem arthroplastySingle center study

Identifiers

PMID29344706
OpenAlexW2785594041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.