ArticleSICOT-J2022
Acetabular revision using trabecular titanium (Delta TT) revision cups: A retrospective case series.
Article in SICOT-J, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single trabecular titanium Cup-Cage for acetabular bone defects during revision hip arthroplasty: Mid-term outcomes.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- The Use of Highly Porous 3-D-Printed Titanium Acetabular Cups in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Acetabular revision with moderate-to-severe bone loss using a trabecular titanium cup-cage construct with impaction grafting.Orthopedic reviews · 2025Article
- 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe annual rate of primary THA has been increasing with new designs promoting THA in the younger population, therefore increasing rates and complexity of hip revision surgeries. Different types of acetabular defects in hip revisions, usually make the use of primary cementless cups quite difficult. In complex defects, using cages with cemented cups or combining cementless cups with metal augments, are possible reconstruction solutions. The Delta TT acetabular revision system provides a solution to complex defects combining the advantages of both cage construct and primary implants, with modularity that helps restore anatomical hip centre and biomechanics. The aim of this study is to evaluate the short-term results of the use of the Delta TT revision system in acetabular revision surgeries. TYPE OF THE STUDY: A retrospective case series.
methods24 patients underwent acetabular revision using (Delta TT) revision system, from 2018 to 2021. The mean follow-up was 20.75 months. Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed using Harris Hip Score.
resultsThe use of the Delta TT revision system in acetabular revision surgery provided adequate pain relief, and early patient mobilization. The preoperative HHS mean of 29.88 improved to a mean of 85.21, at the last, follow-up. None of the patients developed periprosthetic infection or loosening or nerve palsy during the follow-up period.
conclusionShort-term clinical outcomes for the use of the Delta TT revision cup system in acetabular revision are encouraging with good functional outcomes and patient satisfaction.
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.