ArticleArthroplasty (London, England)2021
Use of a modular hip dual-mobility articulation in patients with high risk of dislocation: a relatively small-sized acetabulum in Asian patients may limit its use.
Article in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigation of contact behavior on a model of the dual-mobility artificial hip joint for Asians in different inner liner thicknesses.World journal of orthopedics · 2024Article
- Two-Year Outcomes of Novel Dual-Mobility Implant in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.Advances in orthopedics · 2024Article
- [Femoral neck fractures].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Comparing Outcomes of Total Hip Arthroplasty for Displaced Neck of Femur Fractures in Elderly Patients Utilizing Dual Mobility Cups and Conventional Implants: A Single Center Retrospective Study of 129 Patients.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDual-mobility hip component is widely used in Europe and North America, because it effectively reduces hip dislocation in primary and revision total hip arthroplasties. However, reports were limited on the use of dual-mobility articulation in Asian populations. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to review the use of modular dual-mobility hip articulation in Asian patients with the high risk factor for hip dislocation. We also discussed the potential concern on the use of dual-mobility articulation in Asian patients.
methodsFrom Jan 2018 to June 2019, 17 patients were included in this study. The mean age of the patients was (73.8 ± 9.5) years (range: 57-88 years). The mean size of acetabular cup and modular DM liner were (49.5 ± 3.4) mm (range, 46-58 mm) and (40.7 ± 3.4) mm (range, 38-48 mm), respectively. The mean follow-up period was (15.8 ± 3.9) months (range, 11-24 months). The primary outcome was the rate of hip dislocation. The secondary outcomes included the Harris Hip Score. Differences were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.
resultsHip dislocation, loosening, peri-prosthetic fractures, or intra-prosthetic dislocation was not found in the series. The mean preoperative and postoperative Harris Hip Scores were 42.2 ± 17.2 (range, 15-80) and 74.7 ± 13.5 (range, 52-97), respectively, giving a mean improvement of 32.5 ± 17.2 (range, 4-72). The improvement was statistically significant (p < 0.05).
conclusionsIn Asian patients with high risk of hip dislocation, the use of modular dual-mobility hip component produces promising outcomes without hip dislocation, but the relatively small-sized acetabulum may limit it widespread application in other populations worldwide.
trial registrationHKUCTR-2913 .
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.