ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2018
Tantalum Components in Difficult Acetabular Revisions Have Good Survival at 5 to 10 Years: Longer Term Followup of a Previous Report.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Porous Tantalum Acetabular Cups in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: What Has Been the Experience So Far?-A Systematic Literature Review.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Does Using Highly Porous Tantalum in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Reduce the Rate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Forged to heal: The role of metallic cellular solids in bone tissue engineering.Materials today. Bio · 2023Article
- Can porous tantalum acetabular cups and augments restore the hip centre of rotation in revision hip arthroplasty? Long-term results.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022Article
- Mid-term outcomes of tantalum cup- a single centre study.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2021Article
- Editorial Comment: 2017 Hip Society Proceedings.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe best method for acetabular revisions in patients with severe bone loss remains controversial; typical approaches include jumbo cups, cages, cup-cages, and custom components. Tantalum (TM) components have good results at midterm followup, but the longer term survival and complications are not available. We previously reported on a series of such reconstructions; here we provide additional followup on that group along with a larger study cohort. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the survival at a minimum followup of 5 years of these components implanted in difficult revisions and what is the mechanism of failure? (2) What is the most common complication of these reconstructions, and what hip scores did these patients achieve?
methodsBetween 2001 and 2010, one surgeon performed 150 acetabular revisions, of which 74 (49%) were done using TM components. The general indication for use of these devices was the surgeon's perception that there was sufficient bone loss to place the reconstruction at a high risk of mechanical failure (generally Paprosky Type 3 or 4 or lower Paprosky type with < 50% host bone coverage or morbid obesity). No cages were used during this time. Fifteen patients died and 11 were lost or did not return, leaving 48 hips (46 patients) with a mean followup of 8 years (range, 5-14 years). Of these, 39 were reported on in our previous series, and nine are new in the present series; the overall group here has an additional median of 5 years followup (range, 3-7 years). Five hips had six augments placed to obtain stability. Patients were evaluated by the Harris hip score and standard radiographs; survivorship was estimated using the cumulative incidence competing risks survival analysis. The primary outcome was fixation and survival of the TM component and the secondary outcome was complications.
resultsCumulative incidence competing risks estimate survival free from aseptic loosening was 92% at 10 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.98). Dislocation, the most common complication, occurred in seven of 48 (15%) patients, and five of 48 (10%) had a reoperation for it. Survival free from any reoperation was 84% at 10 years (95% CI, 0.72-0.92). The Harris hip score improved from a mean of 50 points (SD 17) before surgery to 85 points (SD 10; p < 0.001) at latest followup.
conclusionsGiven the findings of this study, TM components appear to provide durable fixation at midterm followup in complex acetabular revisions. Steps to minimize dislocation, the most frequent complication of these revisions, may include the routine use of larger femoral heads. Future studies likely will need to be multisurgeon or multicenter and should evaluate different techniques and components for long-term fixation and the prevention of dislocation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, 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.