Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36935491›Full record

Trial reportJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023

Comparison of the early clinical efficacy of the SuperPath approach versus the modified Hardinge approach in total hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Jiquan Shen, Weiping Ji, Yonghui Shen, Shijie He, Youbin Lin, Zhijun Ye, Bo Wang

Full text readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jiquan ShenDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The People's Hospital of Lishui, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China.
Weiping JiDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The People's Hospital of Lishui, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China. 2276085@vip.sina.com.
Yonghui ShenDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The People's Hospital of Lishui, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China.
Shijie HeDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The People's Hospital of Lishui, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China.
Youbin LinDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The People's Hospital of Lishui, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China.
Zhijun YeDepartment of Orthopaedics, The People's Hospital of Yunhe, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China.
Bo WangDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The People's Hospital of Lishui, Lishui, 323000, Zhejiang, China. bowang3332@lsu.edu.cn.

Funding

The Medicine and Health Technology Funding Project of Zhejiang 2022ZH096the Public Welfare Technology Research Funding Project of Zhejiang LGF18H060004The Public Welfare Technology Research Funding Project of Zhejiang LGD20H060001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the clinical efficacy and advantages of the SuperPath approach for total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in the elderly population.

methodsFrom February 2018 to March 2019, 120 patients were randomly divided into two groups with 60 patients each: the SuperPath group and the conventional group. The results evaluated included the general operation situation, serum markers, blood loss, pain score, hip function and prosthesis location analysis.

resultsThere was no demographic difference between the two groups. Compared with the conventional group, the SuperPath group had a shorter operation time (78.4 vs. 93.0 min, p = 0.000), a smaller incision length (5.8 vs. 12.5 cm, p = 0.000), less intraoperative blood loss (121.5 vs. 178.8 ml, p = 0.000), a shorter hospitalization time (8.0 vs. 10.8 days, p = 0.000) and less drainage volume (77.8 vs. 141.2 ml, p = 0.000). The creatine kinase level in the SuperPath group was significantly lower than that in the conventional group, while there was no difference in the C-reactive protein level and erythrocyte sedimentation rate level. The visual analog scale score was lower one month postoperatively, and the Harris hip score was higher three months postoperatively in the SuperPath group (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the cup abduction angle or anteversion angle of the two groups.

conclusionWe found better clinical efficacy after using the SuperPath approach with less muscle damage, less postoperative pain and better postoperative function than after using the modified Hardinge approach. Trial registration The randomized clinical trial was retrospectively registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on 31/12/2020 (ChiCTR-2000041583, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=57008 ).

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipFemoral Neck FracturesAgedBlood Loss, SurgicalHumansPostoperative PainTreatment OutcomeEarly clinical efficacyLearning curveModified Hardinge approachSuperPath approachTotal hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID36935491
PMCPMC10024840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read21
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.