Trial reportActa orthopaedica2020
Inferior stabilization of cementless compared with cemented dual-mobility cups in elderly osteoarthrosis patients: a randomized controlled radiostereometry study on 60 patients with 2 years' follow-up.
Trial report in Acta orthopaedica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of dual mobility cemented versus cementless cups in primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EFORT open reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Migration patterns of acetabular cups: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RSA studies.Acta orthopaedica · 2023Pooled it
- Comparing dislocation rates by approach following elective primary dual mobility total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Risk factors and modes of failure in the modern dual mobility implant. A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Pooled it
- Cemented and cementless dual mobility cups show similar fixation, low polyethylene wear, and low serum cobalt-chromium in elderly patients: a randomized radiostereometry study with 6 years' follow-up.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Trial
- Novel Clinical Applications of 3D-Printed Highly Porous Titanium for Off-the-Shelf Cementless Joint Replacement Prostheses.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Impact of bone quality on surgical decision-making in total hip arthroplasty: a qualitative analysis in the UK.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Five-year polyethylene cup migration and PE wear of the Anatomic Dual Mobility acetabular construct.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Outcomes of a risk assessment and management program using telecare consultation among patients with diabetes mellitus in general out-patient clinic: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study protocol.Annals of medicine · 2023Article
- Is Cemented Dual-Mobility Cup a Reliable Option in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Diagnostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging in distinguishing temporomandibular disorders: a retrospective chart review.BMC oral health · 2021Article
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
Background and purpose - Elderly patients may benefit from a dislocation low-risk dual-mobility (DM) articulation in total hip arthroplasty, but the best cup fixation method is unknown. We compared cup migration for cemented and cementless DM cups using radiostereometry.Patients and methods - In a patient-blinded randomized trial, 60 patients (33 female) with osteoarthritis were allocated to cemented (n = 30) or cementless (n = 30) Avantage DM cup fixation. Criteria were age above 70 years, and T-score above -4. We investigated cup migration, periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) until 24 months postoperative follow-up.Results - At 24 months mean proximal cup migration was 0.11 mm (95% CI 0.00-0.23) for cemented cups and 0.09 mm (CI -0.09 to 0.28) for cementless cups. However, cementless cups generally migrated more than cemented cups at 12 and 24 months. Cemented cups had no measurable migration from 3 months' follow-up, while cementless cups had not yet stabilized at 24 months in all rotations. Cementless cups showed statistically significantly more maximum total point motion (MTPM) at 12- and 24-month follow-up compared with cemented cups in patients with low systemic BMD (p = 0.01). Periprosthetic BMD changes did not statisticially significantly correlate to proximal migration in either cup fixation group (p > 0.05). PROMs improved similarly in both groups.Interpretation - Cemented cups were well fixed at 3 months. The cementless cups migrated more in patients with low BMD, showed an inconsistent pattern of migration, and migrated in different directions during the first and second year without tendency to stabilization. Cemented fixation of the Avantage DM cup seems safer in elderly patients.
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.