ArticleActa orthopaedica2018
Trabecular metal acetabular components in primary total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06287021 (Bone Remodeling Around a 3D-printed Highly-porous Trabecular Titanium Acetabular Cup in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 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.
Bone Remodeling Around a 3D-printed Highly-porous Trabecular Titanium Acetabular Cup in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Porous Ti-6Al-4V Architectures in Load-Bearing Orthopedic Reconstruction: A Critical Narrative Review of the Translational Gap Across Microstructure, Fatigue, Surface Function, and Clinical Failure Modes.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Highly Porous Tantalum Acetabular Components Without Ancillary Screws Are Non-inferior at 7 Years When Compared With Titanium Components With Ancillary Screw Fixation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Role of Hip Arthroscopy in the Treatment of Avascular Necrosis of the Hip: A Systematic Review.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2022Review
- Tantalum Versus Titanium Acetabular Cups in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Current Concept and a Review of the Current Literature.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2022Review
- Design of Porous Metal Block Augmentation to Treat Tibial Bone Defects in Total Knee Arthroplasty Based on Topology Optimization.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Does cup position differ between trabecular metal and titanium cups? A radiographic propensity score matched study of 300 hips.Acta orthopaedica · 2020Observational
- Long-term survival after cemented versus uncemented total hip arthroplasty for treatment of acute femoral neck fracture: a retrospective study with a mean 10-year follow-up.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the bone morphology around four types of porous metal implants placed in distal femur of ovariectomized rats.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Article
- Increased risk for dislocation after introduction of the Continuum cup system: lessons learnt from a cohort of 1,381 THRs after 1-year follow-up.Acta orthopaedica · 2020Article
- Survival of 11,390 Continuum cups in primary total hip arthroplasty based on data from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.Acta orthopaedica · 2019Article
- CORR Insights®: Do Trabecular Metal Acetabular Components Reduce the Risk of Rerevision After Revision THA Performed for Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Study Using the NJR Data Set.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2019Article
- Uncemented cups with and without screw holes in primary THA: a Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register study with 22,725 hips.Acta orthopaedica · 2019Article
- A single centre study of 41 cases on the use of porous tantalum metal implants in acetabular revision surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Article
- Meta-analysis of individual registry results enhances international registry collaboration.Acta orthopaedica · 2018Article
- 20 years of porous tantalum in primary and revision hip arthroplasty-time for a critical appraisal.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose - Trabecular metal (TM) cups have demonstrated favorable results in acetabular revision and their use in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasing. Some evidence show that TM cups might decrease periprosthetic infection (PPI) incidence. We compared the survivorship of TM cups with that of other uncemented cups in primary THA, and evaluated whether the use of TM cups is associated with a lower risk of PPI. Patients and methods - 10,113 primary THAs with TM cup and 85,596 THAs with other uncemented cups from 2 high-quality national arthroplasty registries were included. The mean follow-up times were 3.0 years for the TM cups and 3.8 years for the other uncemented cups. Results - The overall survivorship up to 8 years for TM cups and other uncemented cups was 94.4% and 96.2%, respectively (p = < 0.001). Adjusting for relevant covariates in a Cox regression model the TM cups had a persistently higher revision risk than other uncemented cups (HR =1.5, 95% CI 1.4-1.7, p = < 0.001). There was a slightly higher, though not statistically significant, revision rate for PPI in the TM group (1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.6, p = 0.09). Interpretation - Risk of revision for any reason was higher for the TM cup than for other uncemented cups in primary THA. In contrast to our hypothesis, there was no evidence that the revision rate for PPI was lower in the TM cup patients. Regardless of the promising early and mid-term results for TM cups in hip revision arthroplasty, we would like to sound a note of caution on the increasing use of the TM design, especially in uncomplicated primary THAs, where uncemented titanium cups are considered to provide a reliable outcome.
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.