SynthesisBMJ open2018
Are short-stem prostheses superior to conventional stem prostheses in primary total hip arthroplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do Cementless Short Tapered Stems Reduce the Incidence of Thigh Pain After Hip Arthroplasty? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Clinically relevant differences in stress shielding between two short-stemmed femoral prostheses.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Trial
- Comparison of 5-year postoperative results between standard-length stems and short stems in one-stage bilateral total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2021Trial
- Cortical hypertrophies in cementless short stem total hip arthroplasty in young patients under 60 years and elderly patients over 75 years-analysis of outcome and risk factors for cortical hypertrophies.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Is the use of primary cementless stem in revision total hip arthroplasty a reliable option? A systematic review.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Review
- Bone-Sparing Hip Arthroplasty in Young and Active Patients: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The use of short cementless femoral stems in total hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures: a scoping review of the literature.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Total Hip Arthroplasty for Untreated Acetabular Fractures: A Case Series.Case reports in orthopedics · 2026Article
- The 3D-Printed Customized Femoral Short Stem Offers Improved Anatomical Parameters Restoration, Fitness and Biomechanical Performance Compared With Traditional Femoral Stem.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- No differences in clinical and radiographic outcomes between standard offset and high offset short cementless stems.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- May the 4th be with you: mixed-methods best-evidence synthesis on 4th-generation alumina-zirconia ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty.EFORT open reviews · 2024Article
- Equivalent revision rates and patient reported outcomes with routine use of a short (125mm) cemented stem for total hip arthroplasty compared to a standard length (150mm) cemented stem. A two surgeon series of 1335 patients.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Total Hip Replacement with a Fully Hydroxyapatite-Coated Shortened Stem: Five- to Thirteen-Year Follow-Up Results.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Short stem hip arthroplasty with the optimys prosthesis is a safe and effective option for obese patients: a mid-term follow-up multicenter study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Observational
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of an uncemented metaphyseal short stem at minimum 10 years of follow-up: a prospective observational study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Observational
- No significant differences in 60-day postoperative complication rates between conventional and shortened stems.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Standard versus short stem cemented ExeterArthroplasty (London, England) · 2023Article
- Femoral Anteversion in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Retrospective Comparison of Short- and Straight-Stem Models Using CT Scans.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with reliable clinical results and high patient satisfaction. Short-stem prostheses (SS) were designed to achieve superior preservation of proximal bone stock and stability compared with those of conventional-stem prostheses (CS). This meta-analysis was conducted to determine the proximal bone remodelling, revision rate, Harris Hip Score, radiolucent line and maximum total point motion values of both SS and CS for primary THA.
methodRelevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving SS and CS in primary THA were identified from electronic databases, such as EMBASE, PubMed and the Cochrane Library.
resultUltimately, 12 RCTs involving 1130 patients (1387 hips) were included. The results showed that compared with CS, SS resulted in less bone mineral density (BMD) changes in Gruen zone 7 at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively (mean difference (MD)=5.11; 95% CI, 1.61, 8.61; P=0.30; and MD=4.90; 95% CI, 1.01, 8.79; P=0.17, respectively). No difference in BMD changes was found for Gruen zone 1 (MD=2.66; 95% CI, -3.31, 8.64; P<0.00001), and no differences were observed for the revision rate (relative risk (RR)=1.52; 95% CI, 0.71, 3.26; P=0.94), Harris Hip Score (MD=-0.38; 95% CI, -1.02, 0.26; P=0.89) or stem migration (MD=0.02; 95% CI, -0.07, 0.11; P=0.04).
conclusionOur results suggest that compared with CS, SS may provide superior bone remodelling and similar survival rates and clinical outcomes. However, the short-term follow-up of the included studies was inadequate to determine the long-term performance of SS.
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.