ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2018
Novel Acetabular Cup for Revision THA Improves Hip Center of Rotation: A Radiographic Evaluation.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel positioning guiders accurately assist in situ acetabular reconstruction for patients undergoing pelvic bone tumor resection.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Article
- Medial wall reconstruction using metal disc augments in revision total hip arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Component Asymmetry in Bilateral Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2023Article
- SuperPath® vs. direct anterior approach : A retrospective comparison between two minimally invasive approaches in total hip arthroplasty.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Article
- Defining the canal for ischial and pubic screws in cup revision surgery.International orthopaedics · 2022Article
- The optimal screw-hole positions of the eccentric revision cup based on a morphological study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Article
- The Diagnosis and Treatment of Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: An International Consensus Symposium.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2022Review
- Mid-term and long-term results of restoring rotation center in revision hip arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Article
- Use of an offset head center acetabular shell in difficult primary total hip arthroplasties.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBone loss in patients undergoing revision THA poses a considerable challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Often, to achieve better fixation in remaining bone, larger diameter acetabular components and reaming superiorly may be necessary. However, this is likely to raise the hip center of rotation, which may lead to altered biomechanics, specifically, insufficiency of the abductor muscles, altered gait, and increased risk of dislocation from impingement. More recently, a newer acetabular shell has been designed to more closely replicate the native hip center of rotation in these circumstances while maintaining adequate fixation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic parameters of this newer design with conventional hemispheric cups in revision THA. Specifically, we assessed the differences in (1) vertical center of rotation (COR) displacement and (2) horizontal COR displacement.
methodsBetween January 2016 and April 2016, five reconstructive surgeons at five institutions utilized a newer highly porous acetabular shell designed with peripheral screw holes and vertically eccentric COR to allow for restoration of center of hip rotation in revision THA. We included all patients who received this device. During this time, the general indications at these sites for using the new device included Paprosky Stage IIA, IIB, IIC, or IIIA acetabular defects. This yielded 29 patients who were subsequently matched (one to two) by cup size and sex to a cohort who underwent revision THA with conventional hemispheric cups between January 2015 and May 2016. To determine hip COR, radiographic measurements were performed. A circle contiguous to the acetabulum was drawn and the center was determined as the hip COR. All measurements were made from the interteardrop line for both the revised and native hips. A line through the teardrops was used for all horizontal measurements. Center position adjustments were made based on the manufacturer-specified values. Comparisons were performed using chi-square tests for categorical and t-tests for continuous variables. There was no difference in the severity of bone loss before the revision in the groups, as evidenced by Paprosky staging of preoperative radiographs.
resultsThe mean vertical COR displacement was smaller in patients who had the novel cup (3.5 mm; range, -12 to 15 mm; mean difference, -7.3 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -13.2 to -1.5) as compared with those who had the conventional cup (10.5 mm; range, -4 to 50 mm; mean difference, 7.3 mm; 95% CI, -12.5 to -2.2; p = 0.003). There was no difference in mean horizontal displacement between the two groups (-0.06 ± 6.1 versus 1.7 ± 7.1; mean difference, -1.8; p = 0.903).
conclusionsAlthough hip COR was improved based on radiographic measurements with the use of this novel acetabular design, and although this may improve hip biomechanics, more studies are required before its widespread adoption for revision cases of this nature can be recommended. Both implant costs and the risks associated with using a new design in practice will have to be justified by studies that evaluate fixation, clinical function and implant survival, and patient-reported outcome scores, all of which were beyond the scope of this preliminary report. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
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.