ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2020
Acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acetabular Bone Defect Classifications in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Custom-made acetabular implants for severe acetabular bone defects: implant evolution, mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes, and complications in 154 consecutive patients over 18 years.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- The Reconstructive Pelvic Anatomy classification system : a valid and reliable classification system for pelvic reconstruction.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Bone defects in knee revision arthroplasty-a therapy-oriented classification.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Optimizing Interhospital Transfers in Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery: Challenges, Insights, and Proposals for Standardized Care in Germany.Clinics and practice · 2024Article
- Personalized digital simulation‑assisted acetabular component implantation in revision hip arthroplasty.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2024Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Acetabular Defects in Revision Hip Arthroplasty Based on 3D Modeling: The Area Increase Ratio (Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Management of acetabular bone loss in revision total hip replacement: a narrative literature review.Annals of joint · 2024Review
- In Vitro Biocompatibility of the Novel Ceramic Composite Baghdadite for Defect Augmentation in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- [Customized partial pelvis replacement: three-dimensional planning and management concepts].Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2023Article
- Handmade spacers for two-stage exchange at the hip.Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2023Review
- APP-guided assessment of acetabular defects in hip revision arthroplasty: a structured approach to a complex situation.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Advanced quantitative 3D imaging improves the reliability of the classification of acetabular defects.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Femoral defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- [Use of custom-made acetabular components (CMAC) as part of a two-stage procedure in patients with severe periacetabular bone loss].Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2022Article
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of jumbo cup in revision total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Primary Stability in Hip Revision Arthroplasty: Comparison of the Stability of Cementless Fixed Augments on a Modular Acetabular Cage System with and without Cranial Straps.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Decision/therapeutic algorithm for acetabular revisions.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe treatment of severe acetabular bone loss remains a difficult challenge. No classification system is available that combines intuitive use, structured design and offers a therapeutic recommendation according to the current literature and modern state of the art treatment options. The goal of this study is to introduce an intuitive, reproducible and reliable guideline for the evaluation and treatment of acetabular defects.
methodsThe proposed Acetabular Defect Classification (ADC) is based on the integrity of the acetabular rim and supporting structures. It consists of 4 main types of defects ascending in severity and subdivisions narrowing down-defect location. Type 1 presents an intact acetabular rim, type 2 includes a noncontained defect of the acetabular rim ≤ 10 mm, in type 3 the rim defect exceeds 10 mm and type 4 includes different kinds of pelvic discontinuity. A collective of 207 preoperative radiographs were graded according to ADC and correlated with intraoperative findings. Additionally, a randomized sample of 80 patients was graded according to ADC by 5 observers to account for inter- and intra-rater reliability.
resultsWe evaluated the agreement of preoperative, radiographic grading and intraoperative findings presenting with a k value of 0.74. Interobserver agreement presented with a k value of 0.62 and intraobserver at a k value of 0.78.
conclusionThe ADC offers an intuitive, reliable and reproducible classification system. It guides the surgeon pre- and intraoperatively through a complex field of practice.
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.