ArticleCureus2023
Accuracy of Total Hip Arthroplasty Templating Using Set Calibration Magnifications.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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.
- Effect of Marker Ball Positioning on Templating Accuracy in Hip Arthroplasty: A Closed-Loop Audit.Cureus · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Accuracy and Reliability of Free Templating Software for Total Hip Arthroplasty.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Planning Accuracy and Stem Offset Assessment in Digital Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Planning in Cementless Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
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
Background Templating for total hip arthroplasty has been adopted over recent decades as a reliable and accurate method for pre-operative planning. The use of calibration markers for this process provides a recognised benefit at the expense of cost, availability and error. Many surgeons use a set magnification of 118% to account for calibration errors when templating total hip arthroplasty. This study aims to assess the accuracy of templating with standardised magnifications and assess the effect of BMI on templating accuracy. Materials and methods A retrospective analysis was performed using a single-surgeon series of 119 consecutive total hip arthroplasties. Anteroposterior radiographs were taken pre- or post-operatively without calibration hardware. Pre-operatively, the total hip arthroplasty was templated on TraumaCad (BrainLab Inc, Westchester, IL) using either 118% or 119% calibration magnification. Post-operative magnification was calibrated using the known femoral head diameter. Templated and implanted prostheses were compared for size. Results At 118%, 61.1% of cups matched those templated with 96.3% of cups within two sizes. At 119%, 52.5% of cups used matched their templates with 100% within two sizes. There was no significant difference between 118% and 119% cup size prediction (p=0.49). A trend was noticed in increasing magnification error with increasing BMI. However, BMI had no significant effect on the accuracy of templating cup size within two cup sizes (p=0.58).
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.