ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2018
A long-term comparative study between two different designs of cemented stems: Distal-cylindrical versus distal-taper.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The superior accuracy of a novel method in total hip wear calculations following radiographic measurement.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to calculate the wear rate of highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) and investigate long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes related to two femoral stem designs, the distal-cylindrical (DC) and distal-taper (DT) stems. MATERIALS AND
methodsOutcomes for the DC and DT stems were evaluated in 110 patients, who underwent total hip arthroplasty using an HXLPE socket, over a 5-year follow-up period. There were 56 hips (53 patients) in the DC group and 60 hips (57 patients) in the DT group. Clinical outcomes were measured using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and radiographic changes. Polyethylene wear rate was calculated using a computer software.
resultsThe mean follow-up period was 135.7 and 124.0 months for the DC and DT groups, respectively. Both stem designs improved hip function. On radiographic assessment, osteolysis around the tip of the stem was more frequent in the DC than in the DT group. Three cases of aseptic loosening of the stem were identified in the DC group, and no cases were identified in the DT group. The 10-year stem survival, using aseptic loosening as the primary endpoint, was 94.1% and 100% for the DC and DT groups, respectively (p = 0.06). The polyethylene wear rate was comparable for both stem groups.
conclusionBetter clinical outcomes were obtained with the DT stem than with the DC stem regardless of the equivalent polyethylene wear rate for the two designs. The DC shape of the stem may increase the risk of aseptic loosening.
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.