ArticleHSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery2020
Reliability and Validity of Acetabular and Femoral Bone Loss Classification Systems in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.
Article in HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pseudotumor following total hip arthroplasty: experience of a tertiary referral center and proposal of the new "PCS" classification system.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Statistical shape models quantify acetabular defects in hip revision surgery: implications for classification and surgical planning.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Reliability and validity of the Paprosky classification for acetabular bone loss based on level of orthopedic training.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Acetabular Defects in Revision Hip Arthroplasty Based on 3D Modeling: The Area Increase Ratio (Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Proximal femoral defect classifications in revision total hip arthroplasty from X-rays imaging to advanced 3D imaging: a narrative review.Annals of joint · 2024Review
- Femoral defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Pelvic discontinuity: a challenge to overcome.EFORT open reviews · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA variety of classification systems have been developed to help surgeons treat patients with acetabular or femoral bone loss in total hip arthroplasty, yet no "gold standard" for classification has been agreed upon. Furthermore, the reliability and validity of the available classification systems remain unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSE: The aims of our study were to determine the reliability and validity of the three most common acetabular and femoral bone loss classification systems (Paprosky, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons [AAOS], and Saleh and Gross).
methodsA systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies that reported on the reliability or validity (or both) of the acetabular and femoral components of the three bone loss classification systems.
resultsIn all, seven articles met our inclusion criteria. Six studies reported on the reliability (all six studies) or validity (three studies) of acetabular bone loss rating systems (286 acetabula), and five analyzed reliability (all five studies) or validity (three studies) of femoral bone loss classification systems (364 femurs). In studies in which either the Paprosky or AAOS acetabular bone loss classifications were used, the classification systems were considered unreliable in 75% and 100% of them, respectively. On the femoral side, the Paprosky classification demonstrated moderate interobserver and good intraobserver reliability. The AAOS femoral bone classification was found to have good intraobserver reliability but poor interobserver reliability. The Saleh and Gross acetabular and femoral bone loss classification systems yielded mixed results, but each was considered reliable in one of the studies looking at these aspects of the systems.
conclusionAlthough surgical techniques, treatment options, and advanced imaging available to the surgeon have evolved over the past few decades, the acetabular and femoral bone loss classification systems, first developed in the 1990s, have remained largely unchanged. Our results indicate that improvements to these systems are necessary in order for them to be as useful as possible in planning the surgical course.
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.