Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35986745›Full record

ReviewArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023

Conversion total hip arthroplasty following extracapsular hip fracture fixation with a cephalomedullary device: a comprehensive review.

Casey M O'Connor, Joseph R Young, Benjamin Villacres Mori, Hamza Murtaza, Steven T Lyons, Cory Czajka, Thomas Bernasek

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Does Stem Design for Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty From Previous Short Intramedullary Nail Predispose to Fracture?Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Casey M O'ConnorDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, 43 New Scotland Road, Albany, NY, United States of America. coconnor151@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9376-9801
Joseph R YoungDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, 43 New Scotland Road, Albany, NY, United States of America.
Benjamin Villacres MoriDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, 43 New Scotland Road, Albany, NY, United States of America.
Hamza MurtazaDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, 43 New Scotland Road, Albany, NY, United States of America.
Steven T LyonsFlorida Orthopaedic Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States of America.
Cory CzajkaDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, 43 New Scotland Road, Albany, NY, United States of America.
Thomas BernasekFlorida Orthopaedic Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States of America.
Albany Medical Center Hospital · USUniversity of South Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the annual incidence of hip fractures and hip fracture fixation rising, the need for conversion total hip arthroplasty has also risen. About half of the 280,000 hip fractures that occur annually in the United States are extracapsular. Commonly extracapsular hip fractures are treated with either cephalomedullary nails (CMNs) or sliding hip screws (SHS). More recently, there has been a shift toward increased CMN use due to increased training with this fixation method as well as perioperative and biomechanical benefits. Given this shift, orthopedic surgeons need to understand the factors that lead to CMN failure. Failed CMN treatment leaves both patients and surgeons with few management options including revision fixation with or without osteotomy, conversion total hip arthroplasty, and conversion hemiarthroplasty. Surgeons must consider the patient and injury characteristics before deciding the best treatment plan. Conversion total hip arthroplasty is indicated in younger patients without femoral head and/or acetabular articular injury, degenerative joint disease, or avascular necrosis. Conversion total arthroplasty is a technically demanding and resource-intensive surgery associated with lower success rates and outcomes than primary total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedic surgeons should have thorough understanding of preoperative workup needed prior to surgery, implant selection associated with best outcomes, most common surgical approaches used, intraoperative considerations, and complications associated with conversion total hip arthroplasty. A comprehensive understanding of these concepts gives patients the best chance of having a successful outcome.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipFracture Fixation, IntramedullaryHip FracturesAcetabulumFracture Fixation, InternalHumansCephalomedullary deviceConversion total hip arthroplastyExtracapsular hip fracture

Identifiers

PMID35986745
OpenAlexW4294071832

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.