Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35288768›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2022

Implant positioning in total hip arthroplasty: influence of horizontal and vertical offset on functionality of prosthetic hip joint.

Arun Vaishy, Mohd Arif, Rahul Aanand, Kamaldeep Singh, Hitesh Kumar Rulaniya, Naveen Kumawat, Ramakishan Choudhary, Paras Choudhary

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Contribution of the BioballInternational orthopaedics · 2023
    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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arun VaishyDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Mohd ArifDepartment of Orthopaedics, Choudhary Bhupendra Hospital, Bhinmal, Rajasthan, Jalore, India.
Rahul AanandDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Kamaldeep SinghDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. kamaldeep04sms@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4893-0085
Hitesh Kumar RulaniyaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Naveen KumawatDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Ramakishan ChoudharyDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Paras ChoudharyDepartment of Dermatology, Dr. Sampurnanand Medical College, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
SMS Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyze the effect of implant position measured in terms of offset on patient reported outcomes (PRO) following hip arthroplasty (THA).

methodsA total of 243 patients of the total hip replacement who had a one year follow-up were included in the study. Standard both hips radiograph was used to asses post-surgery implant position in terms of horizontal offset and vertical offset, and correlated with functional outcome which was evaluated as change in PRO. i.e., Harris hip score (HHS) post-op. With center of hip rotation as reference, horizontal offset was calculated as sum of distance, of centre, from proximal femoral shaft axis and a vertical line through ipsilateral teardrop, and vertical offset as limb length discrepancy. Post-op patients were classified into three groups depending on the measurement of horizontal offset of the operated hip. The patients having operated hip horizontal offset within 5 mm of the normal hip were grouped as restored offset (RO); those having shorter or higher offset by more than 5 mm compared to normal hip were labeled as decreased (DO) or increased offset (IO) group respectively. The groups were further subdivided into suboptimal and optimal function groups based on HHS, and among these groups, limb length discrepancy was evaluated.

resultsPost follow-up mean HHS (78.23 ± 9.96) improved significantly in all three groups (p < 0.0001). The difference in post-operative HHS among DO, RO, and IO groups was significant, with their averages being 72.5 ± 4.7, 82.1 ± 6.5, and 75.2 ± 4.8 respectively (p = .01). Limb length discrepancy was significantly more common in patients with suboptimal functional scores in all three groups.

conclusionThis study concluded that both horizontal offset and vertical offset should be reconstructed in patients operated with unilateral THR due to hip pathology, since both factor demonstrated a comparable additive effect on clinical outcome.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisFemurHip JointHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeHip arthroplastyHorizontal offsetImplant positionVertical offset

Identifiers

PMID35288768
OpenAlexW4220951450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.