ArticleActa orthopaedica2023
Long-term follow-up of 96 patients younger than age 25 with 119 primary cemented total hip arthroplasties.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2023. 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.
- Comparison of Periprosthetic Femoral Bone Remodeling After Total Hip Arthroplasty with Zimmer VerSys Taper Stem or VerSys Midcoat Stem: Long-Term Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Outcome and complication rate of total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than twenty years: which bearing surface should be used?International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Impaction bone grafting for contained acetabular defects in total hip arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeLong-term follow-up of young patients following cemented primary THA is scarce. Therefore, we analyzed the survival of all consecutive primary THAs in patients under 25 years performed at our institute. PATIENTS AND
methodsAll primary THAs performed in patients younger than 25 years in our tertiary care institute between 1988 and 2015 were included (n = 119). Cemented fixation was used in all patients. In the case of acetabular bone deficiencies, reconstruction was performed using impaction bone grafting (IBG). We used Kaplan-Meier analysis to determine the survival of the primary THA with endpoints revision for any reason and aseptic loosening.
resultsThe mean age at the primary THA was 20 years. The most prevalent diagnosis was avascular necrosis (31%). The mean follow-up of the primary THA was 11 years (range 0-32). 2 patients (2 hips) were lost to follow-up. 16 revisions were registered. The survival of any component for endpoint revision for any reason was estimated at 92% (95% confidence interval [CI] 84-96) and 81% (CI 67-90) at 10- and 15-year follow-up, respectively. The survival of any component for endpoint revision for aseptic loosening was 99% (CI 93-100) and 88% (CI 71-95) at 10 and 15 years, respectively. 3 hips were revised due to infection.
conclusionFavorable long-term outcomes of primary THA in very young patients can be obtained using cemented fixation and IBG.
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.