Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34907467›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2021

Combined and hybrid marker models for radiostereometry assessment of polyethylene liner motion in dual mobility hip prosthesis: a proof-of-concept study.

Peter Bo Jørgensen, Bart L Kaptein, Kjeld Søballe, Stig S Jakobsen, Maiken Stilling

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02301182 (A Single-Center Randomized, Patient-Blinded, Prospective Five-Year Study to Compare the Functional Results After Insertion of ADM X3-MoP Cup), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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.

NCT02301182 naenrolling by invitationnot on this map

A Single-Center Randomized, Patient-Blinded, Prospective Five-Year Study to Compare the Functional Results After Insertion of ADM X3-MoP Cup (Stryker) and a CoC Cup (Zimmer) in Primary THA

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of AarhusRan2014 to 2027Enrolled60ConditionsArthroplasties, Hip ReplacementArmsADM X3-MoP Cup, CoC Cup
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter Bo JørgensenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J118-119, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. pbjr@clin.au.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-5327-8095
Bart L KapteinDepartment of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333, Leiden, ZA, The Netherlands.
Kjeld SøballeDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J118-119, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
Stig S JakobsenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J118-119, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
Maiken StillingDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J118-119, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvestigation of polyethylene liner movement in total hip arthroplasty requires bead-marking for radiographic visibility of the liner. However, occlusion of markers poses a challenge for marker registration in radiographs.

methodsThe polyethylene of a dual mobility acetabular system was marked with twelve 1-mm tantalum markers (four groups of three markers) using a custom-made drill guide. Liner motion in a phantom and a patient was investigated with dynamic radiostereometry analysis (dRSA) at 1-year follow-up and static radiostereometry analysis (sRSA) postoperatively and at 1- and 2-year follow-up. A combined marker configuration (CMC) model was calculated from the registered positions of the liner markers and the femoral head in several images. Furthermore, the CMC model and the theoretic marker positions from computer-assisted models of the drill guide were combined in a hybrid model.

resultsThe CMC model included eleven markers in the phantom and nine markers in the patient, which was sufficient for dRSA. Liner movement in the phantom followed liner contact with the femoral neck, while liner movement in the patient was independent. The hybrid model was necessary to determine liner orientation in sRSA recordings, which clearly changed from postoperative to 1- and 2-year follow-up even though the patient was positioned similarly.

conclusionPolyethylene liner motion in dual mobility hip prosthesis can be assessed with CMC models in dRSA recordings. In sRSA, the liner position between follow-ups is unpredictable and analysis requires inclusion of all markers in the model, accomplished with a hybrid marker model.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov [ NCT02301182 ], 25 October 2015.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisHumansPolyethyleneProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureRadiostereometric AnalysisPolyethyleneHip prosthesisPhantoms (imaging)PolyethyleneRadiographyRadiostereometric analysis

Identifiers

PMID34907467
PMCPMC8671599
OpenAlexW4200329563

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.