Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34275012›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2021

Survival rates and reasons for revision of different stem designs in total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia: a regional registry study.

Alberto Di Martino, Francesco Castagnini, Niccolò Stefanini, Barbara Bordini, Giuseppe Geraci, Federico Pilla, Francesco Traina, Cesare Faldini

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Do all anatomic stems perform equally at long-term survival? A regional registry-based study on 12,010 total hip arthroplasty implants according to stem length and neck modularity.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Effectiveness analysis of revision surgery after total hip arthroplasty assisted by artificial intelligence preoperative planning system].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. [Advances in revision surgery after primary total hip arthroplasty for Crowe typeZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2023
    Review
  15. Impact of previous lumbar spine surgery on total hip arthroplasty and vice versa: How long should we be concerned about mechanical failure?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Article
  16. Titanium modular stems in total hip arthroplasty due to developmental dysplasia: a registry comparison with single-taper implants.Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy · 2023
    Article
  17. Comparison of single taper and dual taper versions of the same stem design in total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alberto Di MartinoClinica Ortopedica E Traumatologica I, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy. albertocorrado.dimartino@ior.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0716-4951
Francesco CastagniniOrtopedia-Traumatologia E Chirurgia Protesica E Dei Reimpianti Di Anca E Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Niccolò StefaniniClinica Ortopedica E Traumatologica I, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Barbara BordiniLaboratorio Di Tecnologia Medica, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via di Barbiano, 1/10, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Giuseppe GeraciClinica Ortopedica E Traumatologica I, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Federico PillaClinica Ortopedica E Traumatologica I, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Francesco TrainaDipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Neuromotorie - DIBINEM, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Cesare FaldiniClinica Ortopedica E Traumatologica I, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) in dysplastic hips is challenging, and each specific implant used in this context has been associated with specific complications. A registry study was performed to query survival rates, hazard ratios, and reasons for revision of different stem designs in THAs after developmental dysplasia of the hip. MATERIALS AND

methodsA regional arthroplasty registry was inquired about cementless THAs performed for hip dysplasia from 2000 to 2017. Patients were stratified according to stem design in tapered (TAP; wedge and rectangular), anatomic (ANAT), and conical (CON), and divided on the basis of modularity (modular, M; nonmodular, NM). In total, 2039 TAP stems (548 M and 1491 NM), 1435 ANAT (1072 M and 363 NM), and 2287 CON (1020 M and 1267 NM) implants were included. Survival rates and reasons for revisions were compared.

resultsThe groups were homogeneous for demographics, but not fully comparable in terms of implant features. NM-CON stems showed the highest risk of failure (significant) and a high risk for cup aseptic loosening (2.5%). The adjusted risk ratio showed that NM-CON was more prone to failure (HR versus NM-ANAT: 3.30; 95%CI 1.64-7.87; p = 0.0003). Revision rates for dislocations and stem aseptic loosening did not differ between cohorts.

conclusionsNM-CON stems showed the highest risk of failure, especially high rates of cup aseptic loosening. NM-CON implants were not more prone to dislocations and stem aseptic loosening. Clinical comparative studies are required to investigate the causes of NM-CON failures, which may be due to abnormal acetabular morphology or imperfect restoration of the proximal biomechanics.

Indexed as

Hip ProsthesisRegistriesAcetabulumArthroplasty, Replacement, HipFemaleHip Dislocation, CongenitalHumansMaleMiddle AgedProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureReoperationSurvival RateAnatomicConicalDDHDislocationDysplasiaLooseningModularStemTapered

Identifiers

PMID34275012
PMCPMC8286209
OpenAlexW3184051698

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.