Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34974763›Full record

ArticleHip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy2023

Higher risk of 2-year cup revision of ceramic-on-ceramic versus ceramic-on-polyethylene bearing: analysis of 33,454 primary press-fit total hip arthroplasties registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI).

Justin van Loon, Inger N Sierevelt, Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren, Kim Tm Opdam, Rudolf W Poolman, Gino Mmj Kerkhoffs, Daniël Haverkamp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Justin van LoonXpert Clinics Orthopedie Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5009-1500
Inger N SiereveltXpert Clinics Orthopedie Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anneke Spekenbrink-SpoorenLandelijke Registratie Orthopedische Implantaten (LROI), 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Kim Tm OpdamDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rudolf W PoolmanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Gino Mmj KerkhoffsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Daniël HaverkampXpert Clinics Orthopedie Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7360-9763

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeThe influence of bearing on short-term revision in press-fit total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains under-reported. The aim of this study was to describe 2-year cup revision rates of ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) and ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoPE). PATIENTS AND

methodsPrimary press-fit THAs with one of the three most used cups available with both CoC or CoPE bearing recorded in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) were included (2007-2019). Primary outcome was 2-year cup revision for all reasons. Secondary outcomes were: reasons for revision, incidence of different revision procedures and use of both bearings over time.

results2-year Kaplan-Meier cup revision rate in 33,454 THAs (12,535 CoC; 20,919 CoPE) showed a higher rate in CoC (0.67% [95% CI, 0.54-0.81]) compared to CoPE (0.44% [95% CI, 0.34-0.54]) (

conclusionsA higher 2-year cup revision rate in press-fit THA was observed in CoC compared to CoPE. Cup loosening was the only significantly different reason for revision and seen more often in CoC and mostly aseptic. Future randomised controlled trials need to confirm causality, since the early cup revision data provided has the potential to be useful when choosing the bearing in press-fit THA, when combined with other factors like bone quality and patient and implant characteristics.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisCeramicsHumansPolyethyleneProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureReoperationRetrospective StudiesPolyethyleneAseptic looseningbearingearly revisionpress-fitprimary stabilitytotal hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID34974763
PMCPMC9978866

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.