Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2019
Randomised clinical trial assessing migration of uncemented primary total hip replacement stems, with and without autologous impaction bone grafting.
Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Greater early migration of a short-stem total hip arthroplasty is not associated with an increased risk of osseointegration failure: 5th-year results from a prospective RSA study with 39 patients, a follow-up study.Acta orthopaedica · 2020Trial
- Mid-term outcomes of compaction autologous bone grafting in uncemented primary total hip replacement stems.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Effects of general anesthesia combined with ultrasound-guided lumbosacral plexus block on hemodynamics and postoperative rehabilitation in geriatric patients with total hip arthroplasty.African health sciences · 2024Article
- Review
- A decade of Australian and New Zealand orthopaedic publications: a bibliometric trend analysis from 2008 to 2018.International orthopaedics · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUncemented stems in primary total hip replacement (THR) are concerning in the elderly due to ectatic femoral canals and cortical thinning resulting in higher incidence of fracture and subsidence in this population. To obviate this concern, the authors developed a technique using autologous impaction bone grafting to achieve a better fitting femoral stem. The aim of this randomised clinical trial was to assess the efficacy of the technique.
methodsFrom 2013 to 2015, a total of 98 consecutive participants (100 primary THR procedures) were inducted into a single-institution, single-blinded, randomised clinical trial assessing, with radiostereometric analysis (RSA), the efficacy of autologous impaction bone grafting in uncemented primary THR compared with traditional uncemented primary THR technique. The primary outcome measure was femoral component migration using RSA. Secondary outcomes were post-operative proximal femoral bone density (using DEXA), hip function and quality of life using Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12), hip pain and patient satisfaction.
resultsThere was no difference in femoral component stability (p > 0.5) or calcar resorption between the Graft and No Graft Groups at two years. There was also no difference in OHS, SF-12, pain or satisfaction between the Graft and No Graft Groups at two years (p > 0.39).
conclusionsAutologous impaction bone grafting in uncemented primary THR has shown its short-term post-operative outcomes to be equivalent to standard uncemented technique, whilst offering a better fit in patients who are between femoral stem sizes. AUSTRALIAN CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618000652279.
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.