ArticleHip & pelvis2022
Is Restoration of Hip Center Mandatory for Total Hip Arthroplasty of Protrusio Acetabuli?
Article in Hip & pelvis, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterizing acetabular defects and need of major reconstruction during total hip arthroplasty in patients with acetabular protrusion- a retrospective study.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- Perioperative Considerations for Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.Hip & pelvis · 2024Review
- Long-Term Outcomes of Primary Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty with Acetabular Bone Graft for Protrusio Acetabuli: Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Total Hip Arthroplasty in Protrusio Acetabuli: A Systematic Review.Hip & pelvis · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: While initial fixation using a press-fit of the acetabular cup is critical for the durability of the component, restoration of the hip center is regarded as an attributable factor for implant survival and successful outcome. In protrusio acetabuli (PA), obtaining both restoration of the hip center and the press-fit of the acetabular cup simultaneously might be difficult during total hip arthroplasty (THA). We tested the hypothesis that use of a medialized cup, if press-fitted, will not result in compromise of the implant stability and outcome after cementless THA of PA. Materials and Methods: A total of 26 cementless THAs of 22 patients with PA were reviewed. During THA, press-fit of the cup was prioritized rather than hip center restoration. A press-fit was obtained in 24 hips. A press-fit could not be obtained in the two remaining hips; therefore, reinforcement acetabular components were used. Restoration of the hip center was achieved in 17 cups; 15 primary cups and two reinforcement components; it was medialized in nine cups. Implant stability and modified Harris hip score (mHHS) between the two groups were compared at a mean follow-up of 5.1 years (range, 2-16 years). Results: Twenty-six cups; 17 restored cups and nine medialized press-fitted cups, remained stable at the latest follow-up. A similar final mHHS was observed between the restored group and the medialized group (83.6±12.1 vs 83.8±10.4, Conclusion: Implant stability and favorable results were obtained by press-fitted cups, irrespective of hip center restoration. THA in PA patients showed promising clinical and radiological results.
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.