ReviewThe archives of bone and joint surgery2022
Tantalum Versus Titanium Acetabular Cups in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Current Concept and a Review of the Current Literature.
Review in The archives of bone and joint surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conventional Titanium Acetabular Cups vs. Trabecular Titanium Acetabular Cups in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Ten-year Follow-up Clinical and Radiological Results.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2026Article
- Trabecular metal technology (TMT) cups in primary total hip arthroplasty: outcomes and survivorship of a large cohort.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Literature Review of Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): Part 1-Biomaterials.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Progress in the Application of Porous Tantalum Metal in Hip Joint Surgery.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Review
- Modern cementless acetabular cups in total hip arthroplasty performed for primary osteoarthritis: a comparative registry study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Porous Tantalum Acetabular Cups in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: What Has Been the Experience So Far?-A Systematic Literature Review.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Short- to Mid-Term Clinical and Radiological Results of Selective Laser Melting Highly Porous Titanium Cup in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Cell response and bone ingrowth to 3D printed Ti6Al4V scaffolds with Mg-incorporating sol-gel TaRSC advances · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is becoming an increasingly popular and efficacious medical procedure. There have been a number of studies evaluating tantalum acetabular cups compared with the conventional titanium acetabular cups for use in total hip arthroplasties. We conducted a systematic review and summarize clinical studies comparing tantalum acetabular cups with the conventional titanium acetabular cups for use in primary total hip arthroplasties. Methods: A literature search was performed to find all relevant clinical studies until March 2020, which then underwent a further selection criteria. The inclusion criteria was set as follows: Reporting on human patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty; Direct comparison between tantalum acetabular cups with conventional titanium acetabular cups for use in primary total hip arthroplasty; Radiological evaluation (cup migration, osteointegration); Clinical (functional scores, need for subsequent revision, patient-reported outcomes; Post-operative complications; Reporting findings in the English Language. After a thorough search a total of six studies were included in the review. The primary outcome measures were clinical outcomes, implant migration, change in bone mineral density and rate of revision and infection. Results: Tantalum is superior to titanium with regards to fewer radiolucencies, 100% survivorship at 12 years post-operatively, improved long-term implant osteointegration and survivorship as well as decreasing osteolysis and mechanical loosening. There has been no significant difference in radioisometric analysis, bone mineral density or Harris Hip Score. Revision and infection rates were found to be significantly lower in tantalum group at 10 years from pooled data of national joint registry (England and Wales), while it was found to be higher in the same at 9 years from pooled data of Swedish and Australian registry although this is not statistically significant. Conclusion: The use of tantalum should be reserved for cases of high risk of failure or mechanical loosening, where failure of a contralateral joint occurred. The use of Tantalum carries lower risk of failure and infection. Further studies with longer follow-up would be useful in drawing further conclusions.
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.