Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37024967›Full record

ReviewArthroplasty (London, England)2023

Intraoperative imaging in hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

Yannic Lecoultre, Jan Danek, Ingmar F Rompen, Bryan J M van de Wall, Pascal C Haefeli, Frank J P Beeres, Reto Babst, Björn C Link

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cement augmentation for proximal humerus fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yannic LecoultreLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland. y@lecoultre.cc.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2291-8272
Jan DanekLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Ingmar F RompenLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Bryan J M van de WallLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Pascal C HaefeliLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Frank J P BeeresLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Reto BabstLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Björn C LinkLuzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, 6000, Switzerland.
Luzerner Kantonsspital · CHUniversity of Lucerne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraoperative fluoroscopy (IFC) is gaining popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA), with the aim to achieve better component positioning and therefore eventually reduced revision rates. This meta-analysis investigated the benefit of IFC by comparing it to intraoperative assessment alone. The primary outcome was component positioning and the secondary outcomes included complications and revision rates.

methodsPubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Effect estimates for radiographic cup position, offset/leg length difference and outliers from a safe zone were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as a weighted odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

resultsA total of 10 observational studies involving 1,394 patients were included. No randomized trials were found. IFC showed no significant reduction in acetabular cup position (inclination and anteversion), offset, leg-length discrepancies, revision (none reported) or overall complication rates.

conclusionThe current meta-analysis found no differences in cup positioning, offset, leg length discrepancy, the incidence of complications or revision surgery. It should be acknowledged that the included studies were generally performed by experienced surgeons. The benefit of intraoperative fluoroscopy might become more evident at an early phase of the learning curve for this procedure. Therefore, its role has yet to be defined.

Indexed as

Component positioningHip arthroplastyIntraoperative imaging

Identifiers

PMID37024967
PMCPMC10080809
OpenAlexW4362658885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.