ReviewIrish journal of medical science2023
International primary hip arthroplasty registry review: findings from current reports.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 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.
- Significant functional improvements and radiographic stability following fully cemented total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients: A 2-year prospective study.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Femoral Fixation for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty-An International Registry Perspective.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Does size matter? Outcomes following revision total hip arthroplasty with long or primary stems: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present key information from international registries in relation to primary total hip arthroplasty. The specific questions of interest include which bearings are superior in total hip arthroplasty (THA), which fixation types are optimal, do any specific implants perform better than others, and what is the latest update in the hip fracture setting? This is a comprehensive review of the major English-speaking hip arthroplasty registries across the globe. Key trends and developments in implant performance are identified and presented in the current article. Key points from review of all registries confirm that ceramic-on-polyethylene and metal-on-polyethylene continue to be the commonest bearings. The use of cemented femoral stems is increasing across most regions. Hybrid fixation is now the commonest fixation method in the UK for the first time in registry history. Uncemented femoral stems have a higher early revision rate for periprosthetic fracture than cemented stems across most regions. Dual mobility (DM) bearings are increasing in use and show higher early revision rates than unipolar bearings-they tend to be used for more complex indications (fracture/tumor/revision) and show similar revision rates to unipolar bearings when used exclusively in primary elective THA for osteoarthritis. We present current trends in THA based on current registry data from across the globe. Clinical signals of concern are emerging for THA uncemented femoral stem fixation and DM bearings in specific clinical contexts. These signals should be monitored across the literature in order to reduce the overall revision burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36928594What 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.