ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Unstable Total Hip Arthroplasty: Should It Be Revised Using Dual Mobility Implants? A Retrospective Analysis from the R.I.P.O. Registry.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of Artificial Intelligence and Traditional Methods in Preoperative Planning for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Can EOS and lateral pelvic radiographs reliably identify patient with reduced pelvic roll back at risk for dislocation ?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Does the presence of a lipped highly crosslinked polyethylene liner affect the survival of total hip arthroplasty implants? : a registry-based retrospective cohort study.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Bisphosphonates in Total Hip Arthroplasty Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Dual-mobility implants in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024Review
- Hip-spine relationship: clinical evidence and biomechanical issues.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Review
- Article
- Advances in Hip Replacement Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Which Patients with Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection Are Less Suitable to Successful Two Stage Exchange Arthroplasty Surgery? A Retrospective Clinical Trial.Clinics and practice · 2023Article
- Modern Dual Mobility Implants in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Stability, Survival, and Ion Safety Evaluation: The Comprehensive Review.JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most common surgical procedures in orthopedics; however, it is subjected to different kinds of failures, one of them being dislocation. Many different prosthetic designs have been developed to overcome this problem, such as dual mobility coupling. The main purpose of this article is to determine whether there are differences regarding the revision surgery of unstable THA comparing the risk of failure between dual mobility cup (DMC) implants, standard implants, and among different head sizes. A registry-based population study has been conducted by analyzing data collected by the Emilia Romagna Registry of Orthopedic Prosthetic Implants (RIPO), including a total of 253 implants failed for dislocation and instability that were operated on by cup revision surgery between 2000 and 2019. The selected population has been divided into two groups based on the insert type: standard and DMC. The age at revision surgery was significantly lower in the standard cup group with respect to DMC (
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.