Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34976730›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic translation2021

A novel revision system for complex pelvic defects utilizing 3D-printed custom prosthesis.

Yongqiang Hao, Dinghao Luo, Junxiang Wu, Lei Wang, Kai Xie, Mengning Yan, Kerong Dai, Yongqiang Hao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yongqiang HaoDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Dinghao LuoDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Junxiang WuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Lei WangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Kai XieDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Mengning YanDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Kerong DaiDepartment of Orthopedics, The Ninth People's Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Yongqiang HaoShanghai Key Laboratory of Orthopedic Implants, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 639 Zhizaoju Road, Shanghai, 200011, China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThus far, the hip revision surgery has been widely used and promoted, and the technology has been constantly innovated, such as tissue engineering, 3D printing prosthesis, etc. However, traditional standardized prosthesis, allograft, autograft, bone cement and reinforcing ring are still the main treatment methods in the mainstream pelvic defects classification systems for hip revision. In addition, the mainstream classification systems are still mainly focus on the peri-acetabulum, but less on the large-scale complex pelvic defects that widely affecting the regions far away from the acetabulum, which also have a significant impact on the holistic biomechanical properties of pelvis.

methodsAfter integrating the design experience of custom prostheses and the understanding of biomechanical properties of pelvis, an innovative pelvic defects classification for custom revision was preliminarily proposed, and was practiced in surgeries. Some typical cases were chosen for elucidation in this study, and two observers each evaluated their CT data independently twice. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement were calculated using the kappa statistic to evaluate the reliability. The pelvis defects were classified into five types and two subtypes. The corresponding reconstruction principles, as the main basis to support the classification, were also described in detail. Prosthesis position examination and Harris hip score were utilized to evaluate the clinical outcome.

resultsThe installed prostheses resulted in high concordance with preoperative position planning, significantly improved Harris score, low postoperative complication rate and no re-revision case. In addition, The interobserver and intraobserver agreement were both excellent.

conclusionThe presenting revision system for complex pelvic defects utilizing 3D-printed custom prosthesis and corresponding classification of pelvic defects can preliminarily guide patients' grouping and prosthesis design, and may potentially provide an innovative, feasible, and efficient basis for complex total hip arthroplasty (THA) revision. TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL STATEMENT: This study provides a novel method for prosthetic revision of peri-acetabular pelvic defects, and is expected to systematically improve the efficiency of prosthesis design and surgery in clinical practice.

Indexed as

3D-printedClassification systemCustom designHip revisionPelvic defects

Identifiers

PMID34976730
PMCPMC8683605
OpenAlexW4200248039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.