ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
Restoration of hip geometry after total hip arthroplasty: retrospective comparison of two short stems and one straight stem.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leg length and offset in short-stem total hip arthroplasty: is a single offset-implant sufficient to restore the hip rotation centre within a range of 5 mm?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Do all short stem types restore biomechanical parameters of the hip? Comparison according to femoral neck osteotomy levels.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Analysis of Postoperative Complication and Revision Rates and Mid- to Long-Term Implant Survival in Primary Short-Stem Total Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- A neck-sparing short stem shows significantly lower blood loss in total hip arthroplasty compared to a neck-resecting short stem.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Stem Design in Total Hip Arthroplasty Influences Ipsilateral Knee Valgus: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of 2953 Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Femoral Anteversion in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Retrospective Comparison of Short- and Straight-Stem Models Using CT Scans.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Simultaneous Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty with Straight-Stems and Short-Stems: Does the Short One Do a Better Job?Journal of clinical 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe preservation or restoration of hip geometry following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is of importance, considering that alterations in the centrum-collum-diaphysis (CCD)-angle, femoral offset (FO), acetabular offset (AO) and total offset (TO) change hip biomechanics. Therefore, the most suitable implant should be used. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of two short-stem-systems and one straight-stem-system to reconstruct hip geometry.
methodsTwo-hundred-fifty-one patients (mean age: 62.0 ± 10.0 years; 51.8% males) undergoing THA with three different stem types were retrospectively included, after excluding 11 patients with missing radiological follow-up. Pre- and postoperative radiographic images (group I, ANA.NOVA Alpha Schaft Proxy®, ImplanTec, 12 options: n = 99; group II, Optimys® Mathys, 24 options: n = 62; group III: Corail®-System, DePuy-Synthes, 76 options: n = 90) were analyzed. Differences in pre- and postoperative hip geometry (i.e. CCD, FO, AO, TO) were compared between groups with one-way-analysis-of-variance (ANOVA), and post-hoc t-tests.
resultsThe CCD-angle increased by a mean of 8.4° ± 7.2° from pre-to postoperative, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.097). Significantly larger increases in FO were observed for groups II (4.1 mm ± 7.8 mm) and III (4.9 ± 7.2 mm), in comparison to group I (1.6 ± 6.9 mm; p = 0.006). AO decreased by a mean of 2.2 ± 4.5 mm, with the largest decrease observed in group III (-3.3 ± 5.3 mm), and the smallest for group I (-1.4 ± 3.6 mm; p = 0.011). There was no significant difference in change of TO between groups (p = 0.177).
conclusionsReconstruction of hip geometry using a single-version novel short-stem-system is achievable with comparable results to stem-systems offering multiple options.
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.