Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29654342›Full record

SynthesisOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2018

Bisphosphonates for the preservation of periprosthetic bone mineral density after total joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of 25 randomized controlled trials.

M Shi, L Chen, Z Xin, Y Wang, W Wang, S Yan

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The growing burden of periprosthetic fractures after total hip arthroplasty: identifying overall trends and at-risk groups.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. A guide to selecting upper thoracic versus lower thoracic uppermost instrumented vertebra in adult spinal deformity correction.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Review
  11. Periprosthetic fractures: an unrecognized osteoporosis crisis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Article
  12. Innate Immune Response in Orthopedic Implant Failure.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. [Progress of change in bone mineral density after knee arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M ShiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No.88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China.
L ChenDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital Affiliated with School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No. 3 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China.
Z XinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No.88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China.
Y WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No.88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China.
W WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No.88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China.
S YanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No.88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China. zrjwsj@zju.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3285-2171
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University · CNSir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of bisphosphonates (BPs) on preservation of periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) after joint arthroplasty. It confirmed the protective effect of BPs in a long-term follow-up, and found the influence factors on this effect.

introductionPeriprosthetic bone loss is believed to cause aseptic loosening and failed prosthetic fixation in joint arthroplasty. This meta-analysis which included high-quality randomized controlled trials aimed to analyze the effect of bisphosphonates on maintaining periprosthetic bone mineral density after total joint arthroplasty.

methodsTwenty-five RCTs were included and the total number of participants was 1163 by computerized searches of bibliographic databases. The weighted mean differences with 95% confidence interval were calculated to evaluate the efficacy of BPs on total periprosthetic BMD and the BMD of different Gruen zones. Subgroup analyses identified the potentially influencing factors such as surgical site, cement fixation, and generation of BPs. A descriptive review was conducted for BP-related adverse effects.

resultsThe BPs group presented significantly higher total periprosthetic BMD in the BPs group than that in the control group at 3, 6, 12 months, 2-4 years, and 5-10 years after arthroplasty (P < 0.05). The BPs group presented significantly higher periprosthetic BMD in femoral Gruen Zone 1 and 7 than that in the control group at 3, 6, 12 months, 2-4 years, and 5-10 years (P < 0.05). The heterogeneity was minimized by dividing THA and TKA into two subgroups. Subgroup analyses revealed that the effect of BPs on preservation of BMD was significantly greater in arthroplasty with cemented component than in that with uncemented component at 12 months and 5-10 years (P < 0.05), and the administration of the second and third generation BPs was significantly more effective than the first-generation BPs at 6 and 12 months (P < 0.05). None of the included studies described severe or fatal adverse effects related to BPs.

conclusionsBPs have significantly long-term efficacy on the preservation of periprosthetic BMD after joint arthroplasty. To obtain a better efficacy, the cemented components and the second and third generation BPs are recommended.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, ReplacementBone DensityBone Density Conservation AgentsBone Diseases, MetabolicDiphosphonatesHumansPostoperative CareProsthesis FailureRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesArthroplastyBisphosphonatesBone mineral densityMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID29654342
OpenAlexW2798147761

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.