Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33425373›Full record

ReviewEFORT open reviews2020

Three-dimensional pre-operative planning of primary hip arthroplasty: a systematic literature review.

Maria Moralidou, Anna Di Laura, Johann Henckel, Harry Hothi, Alister J Hart

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EFORT open reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Total hip replacement in adolescents.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. AI-assisted direct anterior approachFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Maria MoralidouInstitute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, University College London and the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
Anna Di LauraInstitute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, University College London and the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
Johann HenckelInstitute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, University College London and the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
Harry HothiInstitute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, University College London and the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
Alister J HartInstitute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science, University College London and the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) pre-operative planning in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is being recognized as a useful tool in planning elective surgery, and as crucial to define the optimal component size, position and orientation. The aim of this study was to systematically review the existing literature for the use of 3D pre-operative planning in primary THA.A systematic literature search was performed using keywords, through PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar, to retrieve all publications documenting the use of 3D planning in primary THA. We focussed on (1) the accuracy of implant sizing, restoration of hip biomechanics and component orientation; (2) the benefits and barriers of this tool; and (3) current gaps in literature and clinical practice.Clinical studies have highlighted the accuracy of 3D pre-operative planning in predicting the optimal component size and orientation in primary THAs. Component size planning accuracy ranged between 34-100% and 41-100% for the stem and cup respectively. The absolute, average difference between planned and achieved values of leg length, offset, centre of rotation, stem version, cup version, inclination and abduction were 1 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, 4°, 7°, 0.5° and 4° respectively.Benefits include 3D representation of the human anatomy for precise sizing and surgical execution. Barriers include increased radiation dose, learning curve and cost. Long-term evidence investigating this technology is limited.Emphasis should be placed on understanding the health economics of an optimized implant inventory as well as long-term clinical outcomes. Cite this article:

Indexed as

3D pre-operative planningprimary total hip arthroplasty (THA)surgical planning

Identifiers

PMID33425373
PMCPMC7784139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.