Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36398241›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2022

Primary total hip arthroplasty failure: aseptic loosening remains the most common cause of revision.

Xiao Feng, Jianming Gu, Yixin Zhou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Xiao FengDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Peking University Fourth School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital Beijing, China.
Jianming GuDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Peking University Fourth School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital Beijing, China.
Yixin ZhouDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Peking University Fourth School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRevision total hip arthroplasty (THA) imposes physical and financial burdens on patients and depletes limited medical resources. Causes for revision THAs can change as technology changes. Therefore, understanding contemporary causes is essential for clinical decision-making. We analyzed causes and trends associated with revision THA in the 2010s.

methodsWe retrospectively identified 803 revision cases after primary THAs were performed at our center from January 2011 to December 2020. Causes for revision were reviewed and compared among patients who were grouped by the date of revision and interval between primary and revision THA.

resultsThe most common causes were aseptic loosening (66.6%), infection (11.0%), osteolysis (6.0%), periprosthetic fracture (5.5%), and instability (3.5%). The values for incidence of infection, fracture, and instability were higher in the early revision group than in the late revision group (threshold, 2 years after primary surgery, all

conclusionsAseptic loosening was the most common cause of revision THA. Revisions due to infection, fracture, and instability occurred more frequently during the early post-THA period after primary THA. Revisions due to osteolysis, instability, and acetabular wear have increased in recent years.

Indexed as

aseptic looseninginfectioninstabilityperiprosthetic fracturerevision THATotal hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID36398241
PMCPMC9641425

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.