ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021
In Vitro Analysis of Wearing of Hip Joint Prostheses Composed of Different Contact Materials.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Toward next-generation hip implants: From failure mechanisms to translational design.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- Therapeutic potential of stem cell-derived exosomes for bone tissue regeneration around prostheses.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025Review
- Magnesium as an emerging bioactive material for orthopedic applications: bedside needs lead the way from innovation to clinical translation.Regenerative biomaterials · 2025Review
- Review
- Special Issue: Biopolymer-Based Materials for Biomedical Engineering.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloy (CoCrMo) and ceramic are the two most common materials for the femoral head in hip joint prostheses, and the acetabular liner is typically made from ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE), or highly cross-linked polyethylene blended with Vitamin E (VEXLPE). The selection of suitable materials should consider both wear performance and cost-effectiveness. This study compared the wear rate between different friction pairs using a hip joint simulator and then recommended a suitable prosthesis based on the corresponding processing technology and cost. All wear simulations were performed in accordance with ISO 14242, using the same hip joint simulator and same test conditions. This study found that when using the same material for the femoral head, the XLPE and VEXLPE liners had a lower wear rate than the UHMWPE liners, and the wear rate of the XLPE liners increased after blending with Vitamin E (VEXLPE). There was no significant difference in the wear rate of XLPE when using a CoCrMo or ceramic head. Considering the wear rate and cost-effectiveness, a CoCrMo femoral head with an accompanying XLPE liner is recommended as the more suitable combination for hip prostheses.
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.