ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022
Clinical and radiological outcomes of jumbo cup in revision total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary Survivorship of Highly Porous Hemispherical Shells in Aseptic Acetabular Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Graft Incorporation and Cup Migration in Acetabular Impaction Bone Grafting for Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 1093 Hips.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Highly Porous Mega Cups in Revision THA: Durable Fixation and Superior Functional Recovery in Severe Acetabular Bone Loss.Orthopedic reviews · 2026Article
- [Early follow-up study on three-dimensional-printed customized porous acetabular components for reconstructing extensive acetabular bone defects in primary total hip arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2025Article
- Utilization of Jumbo-Sized Cups in Conjunction With Dual-Mobility Constructs Does Not Increase Risk of Re-Revision in Revision Hip Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Acetabular screws placement in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty: a narrative review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Review
- Effect of segmental rim defect morphology on press-fit stability of the cementless acetabular cup: a finite element analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Use of ultrasound-guided anterior lumbar plexus block combined with rapid sacral plexus block and laryngeal mask general anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Virtual Surgical Planning and Three-Dimensional Anatomical Models in Radiological Reconstruction of Center of Rotation and Pelvic Brim in Patients with Anterior Column Defects Requiring Revision Hip Arthroplasty.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Utilizing an Acetabular Reinforcement Ring with a Metal Augment: A Minimum Eight-Year Follow-Up Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Trabecular titanium cups in hip revision surgery: a systematic review of the literature.Annals of joint · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Many studies have reported the clinical outcomes of a jumbo cup in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) with acetabular bone defect. We conducted a systematic review to access the survivorship and clinical and radiological outcomes of a jumbo cup in rTHA. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive literature search from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed with the keywords ("revision" OR "revision surgery" OR "revision arthroplasty") AND ("total hip arthroplasty" OR "total hip replacement" OR "THA" OR "THR") AND ("jumbo cup" OR "jumbo component" OR "extra-large cup" OR "extra-large component"). Studies reporting the clinical or radiological outcomes were included. The basic information and radiological and clinical results of these studies were extracted and summarized for analysis. Results: A total of 19 articles were included in the systematic review. The analysis of clinical results included 953 hips in 14 studies. The re-revision-free survivorship of the jumbo cup was 95.0% at a mean follow-up of 9.3 years. Dislocation, aseptic loosening, and periprosthetic joint infection were the top three complications with an incidence of 5.9%, 3.0%, and 2.1%, respectively. The postrevision hip center was relatively elevated 10.3 mm on average; the mean postoperative leg-length discrepancy was 5.4 mm. Conclusion: A jumbo cup is a favorable option for acetabular bone defect reconstruction in rTHA with satisfying survivorship and acceptable complication rates.
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.