Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33068165›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2021

Higher rate of complications with uncemented compared to cemented total hip arthroplasty for displaced intracapsular hip fractures: A randomised controlled trial of 50 patients.

N D Clement, Marietta van der Linden, J F Keating

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A Comparison of Risks and Benefits Regarding Hip Arthroplasty Fixation.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N D ClementDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Little France, Edinburgh, EH16 4SA, UK. nickclement@doctors.org.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8792-0659
Marietta van der LindenCentre for Health Activity and Rehabilitation Research, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, EH21 6UU, UK.
J F KeatingDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Little France, Edinburgh, EH16 4SA, UK.
Edinburgh Royal Infirmary · GBQueen Margaret University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe primary aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of uncemented with cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) for displaced intracapsular hip fractures. The secondary aims were to assess length of surgery, blood loss, complications and revision rate between the two groups.

methodsA prospective double-blind randomised control trial was conducted. Fifty patients with an intracapsular hip fracture meeting the inclusion criteria were randomised to either an uncemented (n = 25) or cemented (n = 25) THA. There were no differences (p > 0.45) in age, gender, health status or preinjury hip function between the groups. The Oxford hip score (OHS), Harris Hip score (HHS), EuroQol 5-dimensional (EQ5D), timed get up-and-go (TUG), pain and patient satisfaction were used to assess outcome. These were assessed at 4, 12 and 72 months after surgery, apart from the TUG which as only assessed as 6 months.

resultsThe study was terminated early due to the significantly (n = 8, p = 0.004) higher rate of intraoperative complications in the uncemented group: three fractures of the proximal femur and five conversions to a cemented acetabular component. There were no significant (p ≥ 0.09) differences in the functional measures (OHS, HSS, EQ5D, TUG and pain) or patient satisfaction between the groups. There was no difference in operative time (p = 0.75) or blood loss (p = 0.66) between the groups. There were two early revisions prior to 3 months post-operatively in the uncemented group and none in the cemented group, but this was not significant (log rank p = 0.16).

conclusionThere was a high rate of intraoperative complications, which may be due to poor bone quality in this patient group. There were no ergonomic or functional advantages demonstrated between uncemented and cemented THA. Cemented THA should remain as the preferred choice for the treatment of intracapsular hip fractures for patients that meet the criteria for this procedure.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip FracturesHip ProsthesisBone CementsDouble-Blind MethodHumansProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBone CementsCementedFunctionOutcomeTotal hip arthroplastyUncement

Identifiers

PMID33068165
PMCPMC7981295
OpenAlexW3092997410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.