ArticleActa orthopaedica2018
Meta-analysis of individual registry results enhances international registry collaboration.
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 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do Dual-mobility Cups Reduce Revision Risk in Femoral Neck Fractures Compared With Conventional THA Designs? An International Meta-analysis of Arthroplasty Registries.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2022Pooled it
- The effect of patient and prosthesis factors on revision rates after total knee replacement using a multi-registry meta-analytic approach.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Pooled it
- Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Pooled it
- Cumulative risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty in registries internationally: systematic review and meta-analysis of selected hip stems and cups.EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
- Cementless fixation in total joint arthroplasty: Factors impacting osseointegration.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Review
- Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty With or Without Antibiotic Bone Cement.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Impact of patient and prosthesis characteristics on common reasons for total knee replacement revision: a registry study of 36,626 revision cases from Australia, Sweden, and USA.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Article
- The rise of registry-based research: a bibliometric analysis.Acta orthopaedica · 2021Review
- International variation in distribution of ASA class in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty and its influence on mortality: data from an international consortium of arthroplasty registries.Acta orthopaedica · 2021Article
- Editorial Comment: 8th International Congress of Arthroplasty Registries.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Article
- CORR Insights®: Are Hooded, Crosslinked Polyethylene Liners Associated with a Reduced Risk of Revision After THA?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2019Article
- International registry collaboration and statistical approaches.Acta orthopaedica · 2018Article
- Review
- Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement and Risk of Infection After Knee Arthroplasty in High-Risk Patients: A Register Based Meta-Analysis.JB & JS open accessArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose - Although common in medical research, meta-analysis has not been widely adopted in registry collaborations. A meta-analytic approach in which each registry conducts a standardized analysis on its own data followed by a meta-analysis to calculate a weighted average of the estimates allows collaboration without sharing patient-level data. The value of meta-analysis as an alternative to individual patient data analysis is illustrated in this study by comparing the risk of revision of porous tantalum cups versus other uncemented cups in primary total hip arthroplasties from Sweden, Australia, and a US registry (2003-2015). Patients and methods - For both individual patient data analysis and meta-analysis approaches a Cox proportional hazard model was fit for time to revision, comparing porous tantalum (n = 23,201) with other uncemented cups (n = 128,321). Covariates included age, sex, diagnosis, head size, and stem fixation. In the meta-analysis approach, treatment effect size (i.e., Cox model hazard ratio) was calculated within each registry and a weighted average for the individual registries' estimates was calculated. Results - Patient-level data analysis and meta-analytic approaches yielded the same results with the porous tantalum cups having a higher risk of revision than other uncemented cups (HR (95% CI) 1.6 (1.4-1.7) and HR (95% CI) 1.5 (1.4-1.7), respectively). Adding the US cohort to the meta-analysis led to greater generalizability, increased precision of the treatment effect, and similar findings (HR (95% CI) 1.6 (1.4-1.7)) with increased risk of porous tantalum cups. Interpretation - The meta-analytic technique is a viable option to address privacy, security, and data ownership concerns allowing more expansive registry collaboration, greater generalizability, and increased precision of treatment effects.
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.