ArticleJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2021
Clinical and radiological outcomes of acetabular revision surgery with trabecular titanium cups in Paprosky type II and III bone defects.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trabecular metal technology (TMT) cups in primary total hip arthroplasty: outcomes and survivorship of a large cohort.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- The Use of Highly Porous 3-D-Printed Titanium Acetabular Cups in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Acetabular revision with moderate-to-severe bone loss using a trabecular titanium cup-cage construct with impaction grafting.Orthopedic reviews · 2025Article
- Customized Additive Manufacturing in Bone Scaffolds-The Gateway to Precise Bone Defect Treatment.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2023Review
- Trabecular titanium cups in hip revision surgery: a systematic review of the literature.Annals of joint · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis prospective study aims to evaluate the mid-term clinical outcomes and radiographic stability of two different types of cementless trabecular titanium acetabular components in total hip revision surgery.
methodsBetween December 2008 and February 2017, 104 cup revisions were performed using trabecular titanium revision cups. Mean age of patients was 70 (range 29-90; SD 11) years. The majority of revisions were performed for aseptic loosening (86 cases, 82.69%), but in all the other diagnoses (18 cases), a significant bone loss (Paprosky type II or III) was registered preoperatively. Bone defects were classified according to Paprosky acetabular classification. We observed 53 type II defects and 42 type III defects. Cups were chosen according to the type of defect.
resultsAverage follow-up was 91 (range 24-146) months. Mean Harris Hip Score (HHS) improved from 43.7 (range 25-70; SD 9) preoperatively to 84.4 (range 46-99; SD 7.56) at last follow-up. One (1.05%) cup showed radiographic radiolucent lines inferior to 2 mm and was clinically asymptomatic. One (1.05%) cup was loose and showed periacetabular allograft reabsorption. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was assessed to be 88.54% (95% CI 80.18-93.52%) at 71 months, with failure of the cup for any reason as the endpoint.
conclusionTrabecular titanium revision cups showed good clinical and radiographic results at mid-term follow-up in Paprosky type II and III bone defects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV prospective case series.
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.