ArticleThe Iowa orthopaedic journal2022
Patient Reported Outcomes After Conversion vs. Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Matched Analysis.
Article in The Iowa orthopaedic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Conversion and Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in a Retrospective Study of 140 Patients: Recommendations for Tailored Interventions.Hip & pelvis · 2026Article
- Article
- The Anterior-Based Muscle-Sparing Approach for Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty is Safe and Effective.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Conversion total hip arthroplasty (cTHA) is increasingly utilized as a salvage procedure for complications associated with fracture fixation around the hip and acetabulum and for failed hip preservation surgery. While primary THA (pTHA) has a high success rate, little is known about outcomes following conversion THA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate patient reported outcomes (PROs) and complication rates following conversion THA compared to primary THA. Methods: Patients that underwent cTHA or pTHA from 2015-2020 at a large tertiary referral academic center were retrospectively identified. THA patients were propensity matched in a 1:1 fashion by age, body mass index (BMI), and sex. Pain scores and PROMIS physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), and depression (DA) scores were compared at preoperative and final postoperative follow up timepoints using independent t-tests. Differences in complication and reoperation rates between cohorts were assessed using chi square analysis. Results: A total of 118 THAs (59 cTHA, 59 pTHA) were included in this analysis with an average follow up of 21.3 months. cTHAs were most commonly performed following hip fracture fixation (50.8%). The conversion cohort had significantly longer lengths of stay (3.6 days vs 1.9 days, p<0.01) and greater use of revision-type implants (39.0% vs 0.0%, p<0.01) compared to pTHA. There was no significant difference in complication rates (cTHA = 15.3%, pTHA = 8.5%; p=0.26), with intraoperative fracture being the most common for both. Primary and conversion THA groups also experienced similar reoperation rates (cTHA = 5.1%, pTHA = 6.8%; p=0.70). No significant differences in PROs at final follow up were identified between groups. Conclusion: Patients undergoing cTHA required increased utilization of revision hip implants and had longer lengths of stay, but had comparable complication and reoperation rates, and ultimately demonstrated similar improvements in PROMIS scores compared to a matched cohort of pTHA patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36601233PMC9769348W4313544517What 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.