ArticleThe archives of bone and joint surgery2018
Total Hip Replacement Revision in a Single Brand Small Cementless Stem - Our Experience after the Findings of the National Joint Registry.
Article in The archives of bone and joint surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a minimum data set for total joint arthroplasty registries.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- High grade femoral stem subsidence in uncemented hip hemiarthroplasty - A radiographic analysis and an early prediction while treating femoral neck fractures.International orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Aseptic Loosening of Smaller Corail Stems in Heavy, Active Males: A Report of Three Cases.Cureus · 2021Article
- National Joint Registry of Iran.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCementless total hip replacement is the common THR performed in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. The Corail stem is the most popular cementless implant and has a ODEP 10A rating. Review of its performance in the registry identified an increase rate of revision amongst the smaller stem sizes. However, clarity was not provided on the explanation for this finding. We reviewed our own experience of smaller stems with a view to understanding the reasons for revision.
methodsWe reviewed a single centre, single surgeon experience of the smaller Corail stem sizes for a ten-year period from 2003 to 2013. All data was collected from a prospectively maintained database. Details of clinical and radiological follow up were collected for all patients who had Corail stem size 8 and 9 implanted. Revision for any cause was taken as our endpoint.
results542 patients underwent total hip arthroplasty using the Corail stem during the study period. 53 small size Corail stems were implanted. The average age was 59 (range 17-88 years) and the average follow up was 41.4 months (range 1-118 months). 6 patients underwent revision during the study period, but only 4 stems required revision. The reasons for revision were aseptic loosening, fracture and metal-on metal complications. Only two stems required revision for stem related factors (3.8%).
conclusionThere was no evidence of an increased rate of revision in the small Corail stems in our cohort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30637305PMC6310183W2791505057What 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.