ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022
Hip Labral Reconstruction With a Polyurethane Scaffold: Restoration of Femoroacetabular Contact Biomechanics.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Contribution of Soft Tissue and Bony Stabilizers to the Hip Suction Seal: A Systematic Review of Biomechanical Studies.The American journal of sports medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Characterization of the acetabular labrum articular surface and its translation into biomimetic graft design.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Arthroscopic cam resection reduces femoroacetabular contact pressure : a cadaver study.Bone & joint research · 2025Article
- Polyurethane Scaffold vs Fascia Lata Autograft for Hip Labral Reconstruction: Comparison of Femoroacetabular Biomechanics.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Many advances have been made in hip labral repair and reconstruction and in the restoration of the suction seal. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical effects of segmental labral reconstruction with a synthetic polyurethane scaffold (PS) in comparison with segmental labrectomy. Our hypothesis was that reconstruction with a icroporous polyurethane implant would normalize joint kinetics of the hip and restore the suction seal. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: We used 10 hips from 5 fresh-frozen pelvises with an intact acetabular labrum without osteoarthritis. Using an intra-articular pressure measurement system, the contact area, contact pressure, and peak force were assessed for the following conditions: intact labrum, partial anterosuperior labrectomy, and PS reconstruction. For each condition, all specimens were analyzed in 4 positions (90° of flexion, 90° of flexion and internal rotation, 90° of flexion and external rotation, and 20° of extension) and underwent a labral seal test. The relative change from the intact condition was determined for all conditions and positions. Results: Compared with the intact labrum, labrectomy resulted in a significant decrease in the contact area ( Conclusion: Femoroacetabular contact biomechanics significantly worsened after partial labrectomy; reconstruction using a PS restored the contact area and peak force to the intact state and improved the contact pressure increases seen after partial labrectomy. The contact area and peak force were normalized, and the labral seal was re-established in most cases. Clinical Relevance: This study provides biomechanical evidence for the use of a scaffold for labral reconstruction.
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.