SynthesisActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2019
Outcome of cages in revision arthroplasty of the acetabulum: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Custom-Made 3D-Printed Implants for Paprosky Type 3A and 3B Acetabular Defects: Early Surgical and Functional Outcomes from a Multicentre Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- "Cup-in-Cup Technique" in the Management of Acetabular Defects in Hip Arthroplasty: Early to Midterm Results.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2025Article
- Treatment of Hip Osteoarthritis with Severe Acetabular Bone Defects by Total Hip Arthroplasty Using the Restoration GAP II Reinforcement Ring: A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2025Article
- Iliac Stemmed Cups: A Review of History, Indications, and Clinical Outcomes in Revision Hip Arthroplasty and Primary Severe Dysplasia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison of the Trabecular Titanium Acetabular Shell with Burch-Schneider Cages in Revision Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Custom-made implants for massive acetabular bone loss: accuracy with CT assessment.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Long-term functional results of revision hip replacement using Burch-Schneider cages.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Trabecular titanium cups in hip revision surgery: a systematic review of the literature.Annals of joint · 2023Review
- Trabecular titanium cups in acetabular revision arthroplasty: analysis of 10-year survivorship, restoration of center of rotation and osteointegration.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- The use of a non-biological, bridging, antiprotrusio cage in complex revision hip arthroplasty and periacetabular reconstructive oncologic surgery. Is still today a valid option?: A mid/long-term survival and complications' analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Decision/therapeutic algorithm for acetabular revisions.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Impingement of the Sciatic Nerve due to a Protruding Acetabular Cage Rim.Arthroplasty today · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and aim of the workTo investigate the clinical, radiological and functional outcomes of acetabular revisions with acetabular reinforcement rings and cages.
methodsA comprehensive literature study of international databases was performed. Inclusion criteria were cementless revisions, use of reinforcement rings, radiological and clinical follow-up, availability of full text in English, publication between January 1990 and July 2018. In a second further analysis, we selected only studies describing patients with more severe acetabular defects (AAOS 3, AAOS 4, Paprosky III). Data extracted included mean follow-up period, radiographic follow-up, functional scores, implant failures and survival rate.
resultsWe included in our review 1327 acetabular revisions described in 28 articles. The most commonly used reinforcement rings were Burch-Schneider ring, the Muller ring and the Ganz ring. Mean follow-up for all patients together was 8.8 years. Clinical or radiological signs of loosening were reported in 191 patients, 83 patients needed further acetabular revision for aseptic loosening and 41 patients received additional surgeries for septic loosening. The mean value of the Harris Hip Score reported at the last follow-up was 76.3. Nineteen articles fulfilled the criteria for further analysis about high-grade acetabular bone defects. We analyzed 649 revisions with mean follow-up period of 8.2 years. Clinical or radiological loosening was reported in 90 patients, additional acetabular revision was performed in 39 patients and 25 patients needed further surgeries for deep infection.
conclusionAcetabular revisions with cages are characterized by good survival rates and functional scores with a mean follow-up period of 8 years.
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.