ArticleThe Journal of arthroplasty2021
Is Combined Anteversion Equally Affected by Acetabular Cup and Femoral Stem Anteversion?
Article in The Journal of arthroplasty, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of Combined Anteversion Targets to Optimize Impingement-free Range of Motion Across Femoral Head Sizes: A Simulation Study.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- [Why does a total hip replacement dislocate? : Diagnosis and management].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Relating total hip replacement and acetabular cup positioning with outcome: A systematic review.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Total Hip Arthroplasty With Subtrochanteric Osteotomy for Crowe IV Dysplasia Using an Extensile Direct Anterior Approach: A Surgical Technique.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- 15-year survivorship of a unique dual-modular femoral stem in primary hip arthroplasty.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- How to Estimate Femoral Stem Anteversion During Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Cemented or uncemented fixation: Which allows a more acceptable prosthetic femoral version in total hip arthroplasty?Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- A novel method for evaluating combined component anteversion in total hip arthroplasty on cross-table lateral hip radiographs.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- The Current Proposed Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgical Planning Guidelines Based on Classification of Spine Stiffness May be Flawed Due to Incorrect Assumptions.The Journal of arthroplasty · 2023Article
- A Comparison of Radiographic Outcomes after Total Hip Arthroplasty between the Direct Lateral Approach and Posterior Lateral Approach with EOS 2D/3D X-Ray Imaging System.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- Imaging in Hip Arthroplasty Management-Part 1: Templating: Past, Present and Future.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo create a safe zone, an understanding of the combined femoral and acetabular mating during hip motion is required. We investigated the position of the femoral head inside the acetabular liner during simulated hip motion. We hypothesized that cup and stem anteversions do not equally affect hip motion and combined hip anteversion.
methodsHip implant motion was simulated in standing, sitting, sit-to-stand, bending forward, squatting, and pivoting positions using the MATLAB software. A line passing through the center of the stem neck and the center of the prosthetic head exits at the polar axis (PA) of the prosthetic head. When the prosthetic head and liner are parallel, the PA faces the center of the liner (PA position = 0, 0). By simulating hip motion in 1-degree increments, the maximum distance of the PA from the liner center and the direction of its movement were measured (polar coordination system).
resultsThe effect of modifying cup and stem anteversion on the direction and distance of the PA's change inside the acetabular liner was different. Stem anteversion influenced the PA position inside the liner more than cup anteversion during sitting, sit-to-stand, squatting, and bending forward (P = .0001). This effect was evident even when comparing stems with different neck angles (P = .0001).
conclusionCup anteversion, stem anteversion, and stem neck-shaft angle affected the PA position inside the liner and combined anteversion in different ways. Thus, focusing on cup orientation alone when assessing hip motion during different daily activities is inadequate.
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.