ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2021
Clinical and Radiological Outcome of Acetabular Reconstruction Rings in Complex Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic and prognostic relevance of plain radiographs for periprosthetic joint infections of the hip: a literature review.European journal of medical research · 2024Pooled it
- Stable Lord Madreporic Femoral Stem 32 Years After Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Reinforcement Ring-Augmented Hip Arthroplasty: A 35-Year Follow-up.Arthroplasty today · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcetabular reconstruction in complex primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) with bone loss poses a great challenge. We aim to evaluate the medium-term clinical and radiological outcome of reconstruction rings used in these difficult situations.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of acetabular reconstructions with Muller ring or Bursh-Schneider cage from January 2009 to December 2016. The reconstruction rings were used in 66 hips (65 patients). There were 41 complex primary THA and 25 revision THA. The mean follow-up period was 76 months (range, 37-167 months). Clinical evaluation includes the assessment of Harris hip score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, limb length discrepancy, and activities of daily living. The radiographs were analyzed for any signs of loosening, osteolysis, acetabular migration, and heterotopic ossification.
resultsThe overall survival rate was 95% for revision in aseptic loosening and 87% for any reason at an average follow-up of 6.3 years. Twelve patients died and 9 patients were lost to follow-up leaving 45 patients for final functional analysis. Among the 45 patients, excellent to good results were seen in 33 patients, fair results were seen in 5 patients, poor results were seen in seven patients. Two patients had aseptic loosening and another two patients developed deep chronic infection awaiting two-stage revision.
conclusionReconstruction rings still place a role in the armamentarium for complex acetabular reconstruction. It helps to reliably restore the bone stock, have an acceptable survival rate and satisfactory functional outcome at medium to long-term follow-up.
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.