Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37114404›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2023

CT-based migration analysis is more precise than radiostereometric analysis for tibial implants: a phantom study on a porcine cadaver.

Lars H W Engseth, Anselm Schulz, Are H Pripp, Stephan M H Röhrl, Frank-David Øhrn

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT06499038 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Migration Analysis of a Hybrid Hip Replacement Evaluating Stem and Ancillary Acetabular Screw Fixation-A Randomized Controlled CT-RSA Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHelse Møre og Romsdal HFRan2024 to 2028Enrolled60ConditionsHip OsteoarthritisArmsTotal Hip Arthroplasty
NCT06507046 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Robotic Assisted Surgery Comparing Personalized Alignment Versus Mechanical Alignment of Total Knee Arthroplasty - A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHelse Møre og Romsdal HFRan2024 to 2035Enrolled152ConditionsKnee OsteoarthritisArmsTotal knee replacement
NCT06525610 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Assessment of Bone Displacement Under Loading Following Periprosthetic Fracture Repair With Weight-Bearing CT

TypeinterventionalSponsorLondon Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sRan2024 to 2025Enrolled21ConditionsPeriprosthetic Fracture Around Prosthetic Joint Implant KneeArmsPeriprosthetic Fracture Knee Repaired CT Scans
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Precision, Accuracy, and Observer Reliability of Computed Tomography-Based Radiostereometric Analysis in Measuring Femoral Stem Migration In Vitro.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Inducible displacement of cementless total knee arthroplasty components with conventional and weight-bearing CT-based radiostereometric analysis.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  11. Accuracy and precision of Volumetric Matching Micromotion Analysis (V3MA) is similar to RSA for tibial component migration in TKA.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  12. Evaluation of conventional and CT-based radiostereometric analysis for inducible displacement measurements after total hip arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lars H W EngsethDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital Ullevål, Oslo; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo. lars.engseth@gmail.com.
Anselm SchulzDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital Ullevål, Oslo.
Are H PrippOslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo.
Stephan M H RöhrlDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital Ullevål, Oslo; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo.
Frank-David ØhrnOrthopaedic Department, Kristiansund Hospital, Møre and Romsdal Hospital Trust, Kristiansund; Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science (INB), NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NONorwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeRadiostereometric analysis (RSA) is the gold standard for migration analysis, but computed tomography analysis methods (CTRSA) have shown comparable results in other joints. We attempted to validate precision for CT compared with RSA for a tibial implant. MATERIAL AND

methodsRSA and CT were performed on a porcine knee with a tibial implant. Marker-based RSA, model-based RSA (MBRSA), and CT scans from 2 different manufacturers were compared. CT analysis was performed by 2 raters for reliability evaluation.

results21 double examinations for precision measurements for RSA and CT-based Micromotion Analysis (CTMA) were analysed. Mean (95% confidence interval) precision data for maximum total point motion (MTPM) using marker-based RSA was 0.45 (0.19-0.70) and 0.58 (0.20-0.96) using MBRSA (F-statistic 0.44 [95% CI 0.18-1.1], p = 0.07). Precision data for total translation (TT) for CTMA was 0.08 (0.03-0.12) for the GE scanner and 0.11 (0.04-0.19) for the Siemens scanner (F-statistic 0.37 [0.15-0.91], p = 0.03). When comparing the aforementioned precision for both RSA methods with both CTMA analyses, CTMA was more precise (p < 0.001). The same pattern was seen for other translations and migrations. Mean effective radiation doses were 0.005 mSv (RSA) (0.0048-0.0050) and 0.08 mSv (CT) (0.078-0.080) (p < 0.001). Intra- and interrater reliability were 0.79 (0.75-0.82) and 0.77 (0.72-0.82), respectively.

conclusionCTMA is more precise than RSA for migration analysis of a tibial implant, has overall good intra- and interrater reliability but higher effective radiation doses in a porcine cadaver.

Indexed as

Hip ProsthesisRadiostereometric AnalysisAnimalsCadaverReproducibility of ResultsSwineTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID37114404
PMCPMC10141323
OpenAlexW4367316547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.