ArticleSICOT-J2021
Femoral head penetration in Vitamin-E polyethylene liner versus conventional liners in total hip arthroplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials.
Article in SICOT-J, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluation of Vitamin E in Trauma and Orthopaedics: A Narrative Synthesis.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDebate encompasses the use of Vitamin E Polyethylene or conventional Polyethylene liner in primary hip arthroplasty. Does the Inclusion of Vitamin E in PE give adequate protection from oxidation and maintains lower rates of wear? PATIENTS AND
methodsWe performed this study following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Statement (PRISMA) and the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Studies were included from any region, written in any language. We had only the randomised control trials comparing the femoral head penetration between Vitamin-E diffused highly cross-linked polyethylene (VEPE) liner and conventional liners in primary total hip arthroplasty.
resultsWe included 10 studies in this meta-analysis. We conducted them using Review Manager V.5.0. We computed the risk ratio to measure the treatment effect, considering the heterogeneity. We used Random-effect models. VEPE had insignificant marginal advantages for FHP within three months post-operative. Additionally, VEPE showed significantly less FHP after two and five years. After one year, it showed significantly less FHP with the VEPE group versus the UHMWPE cohort and a non-significant difference between the VEPE and XLPE group.
conclusionsIn terms of FHP, this metanalysis shows less FHP for the VEPE than conventional PE. A longer follow-up period is required to evaluate whether the oxidation protection gained by Vitamin E results in lower wear rates, less osteolysis, and aseptic loosening compared to the conventional PE in the long term.
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.