ArticleJournal of orthopaedics
Clinical and radiographic outcomes with the Nanos™ short-stem hip implant at 24 months: A prospective, single-center study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stem subsidence in total hip arthroplasty: retrospective investigation of a short stem using a simple measurement approach.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes after total hip arthroplasty with the NANOS neck preserving hip stem: a 10 to 16-year follow-up study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimShort-stem total hip arthroplasty is designed to preserve proximal bone stock in case of eventual revision, potentially benefiting younger and more active patients. This prospective, single-center study assessed the safety and performance of the partially neck-sparing Nanos™ short-stem uncemented prosthesis at 24 months using clinical outcome scores and radiographic results.
methodsBetween April 2011 and February 2015, 52 subjects (mean age, 54.9 years) underwent total hip arthroplasty and were followed up at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. The primary outcome was improvement in quality of life as measured by the Short-Form 36 Mental Component Score (SF-36 MCS). Secondary clinical outcomes included the Harris Hip Score, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Postel Merle d'Aubigné-Score, Activity Level University of California, Los Angeles score, and Pain Visual Analogue Scale. Complications and radiographic images were also recorded at each follow-up.
resultsMean SF-36 MCS score significantly improved from baseline to final follow up at 24 months (61.3 vs. 79.5, respectively; p < 0.001). All secondary clinical outcomes also showed significant improvement (p < 0.001) during this time period. Neutral stem positioning was achieved in 45 subjects (86.5%). Two subjects (3.8%) underwent revisions: one for a periprosthetic fracture unrelated to the study device and another due to a prosthetic joint infection. Intraoperatively, one fissure fracture of the acetabulum occurred.
conclusionTotal hip arthroplasty with the Nanos short-stem led to significant clinical improvements and a high subjective satisfaction rate at 24 months. Further follow-up will determine whether these effects are sustained in the long term.
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.