ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2020
Comparison of short-stem with conventional-stem prostheses in total hip arthroplasty: an 8-year follow-up study.
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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short Femoral Stem Performance in Femoral Hip Fracture: Clinical and Radiological Evaluation and Comparative Study of Patients Older than 65 Years.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Subsidence and Clinical Impact of Obesity in Short-Stem Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Collarless, Triple-Tapered, Cementless Stem.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- No differences in clinical and radiographic outcomes between standard offset and high offset short cementless stems.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Stem Alignment With the Tapered Wedge Cementless Stem "Accolade II" Does Not Affect Bone Mineral Density Over 5 Years After Total Hip Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Learning Curve for Short-Stem Total HIP Arthroplasty through an Anterolateral Approach.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Is it reasonable to shorten the length of cemented stems? A finite element analysis and biomechanical experiment.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Biomechanics of a cemented short stem: a comparative in vitro study regarding primary stability and maximum fracture load.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2021Article
- Use of short stems in revision of standard femoral stem: A case report.World journal of orthopedics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCoxarthrosis is a common disease of the adult hip joint. Elderly patients have mainly been treated with total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, younger patients are increasingly affected. Short-stem prostheses were developed for this special patient group. There have been few studies on the clinical outcomes of this type of prosthesis. This study compared the mid-term results of a short-stem prosthesis and a standard-stem prosthesis 8 years after implantation.
methodsAccording to our clinical registry, patients who received a short-stem prosthesis before 2011 were identified. Patients in the standard-stem prosthesis group were matched based on the sex, age, height, weight, and degree of arthrosis. At the follow-up time, the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were collected and compared with the preoperative values.
resultsFifty-five patients could be matched and analyzed for both groups. No patients needed revision surgery. In both groups, there were significant improvements at the follow-up time. The pre- and postoperative mHHSs, UCLA scores, and VAS scores were 41.9 and 95 (p < 0.0001), 3.75 and 7.9 (p < 0.0001), and 7.6 and 0.9 (p < 0.0001), respectively, in the short-stem group and 44.8 and 96.25 (p < 0.0001), 3.6 and 7.7 (p < 0.0001), and 7.7 and 0.9 (p < 0.0001), respectively, in the control group, with no significant differences between the groups at the follow-up time.
conclusionThe short-stem prosthesis provides mid-term results comparable to those of a standard-stem prosthesis. In both groups, excellent patient-reported outcomes were achieved after an average of 8 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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.