Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33666673›Full record

ArticleDer Orthopade2021

Short versus conventional stem in cementless total hip arthroplasty : An evidence-based approach with registry data of mid-term survival.

Arnd Steinbrück, Alexander W Grimberg, Johanna Elliott, Oliver Melsheimer, Volkmar Jansson

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Der Orthopade, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. [Short-stem THA-complications and therapy options].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arnd SteinbrückDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital of Munich (LMU), Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. Arnd.Steinbrueck@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Alexander W GrimbergDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital of Munich (LMU), Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Johanna ElliottGerman Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD Deutsche Endoprothesenregister gGmbH), Straße des 17. Juni 106-108, 10623, Berlin, Germany.
Oliver MelsheimerGerman Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD Deutsche Endoprothesenregister gGmbH), Straße des 17. Juni 106-108, 10623, Berlin, Germany.
Volkmar JanssonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital of Munich (LMU), Campus Grosshadern, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShort-stemmed total hip arthroplasty (THA) is well established and gaining popularity in Germany. The perception that short stems may predispose to primary instability in the femur has resulted in a more thorough follow-up of younger patient cohorts than the typical uncemented THA population. To address this issue, an evidence-based approach is presented for a retrospective mid-term survival analysis of a large registry-based cohort in primary cementless THA comparing short stems with a matched group of conventional stems. MATERIAL AND

methodsPropensity score matching (PSM, see Infobox 1) was used on 131,580 primary cementless THAs fulfilling the inclusion criteria performed between November 2012 and September 2019 and the cumulative probability of revision (CPR) of short and conventional stems for any reason, for reasons excluding prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and due to PJI were compared.

resultsAfter PSM at 1:1 balanced groups of 17,526 short stems and of 17,526 conventional stems were achieved demonstrating no significant difference for CPR for any reason and for reasons excluding PJI. Matched CPR for any reason was 2.9% (95% confidence interval, CI, 2.4-3.5%) 5 years after primary THA in the short stem and 3.1% (95% CI 2.7-3.4%) in the conventional stem group. The CPR excluding PJI was 2.2% (95% CI 1.7-2.7%) vs. 2.1% (95% CI 1.8-2.4%). In contrast, the incidence of PJI was statistically significant lower for short stems.

conclusionFor the considered period, there was no statistically significant survival difference in uncemented THA between comparison groups but a lower incidence for PJI in short-stem THA. Further analyses of registry data are required to rule out range of indications and late mechanical failure of short stems.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisGermanyHumansProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureRegistriesReoperationRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeArthroplasty registryPropensity score matchingProsthetic joint infectionSurvival analysisTotal hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID33666673
PMCPMC7990843
OpenAlexW3134484309

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.