ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
Heterotopic hip ossification resection: monocentric experiences of associated factors, outcomes, and complications.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Periprosthetic joint infection and heterotopic ossification after total hip arthroplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe exponential increase in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has led to acute and chronic surgery-related complications. Common chronic and local complications are represented by hip ossification (HO). The aim of our study was to assess the clinical and radiological correlates of patients undergoing surgical removal of heterotopic ossifications after THA and the possible association between HO and prosthetic joint infection.
methodsData of 26 patients who underwent surgical removal of periprosthetic calcifications after THA from 2000 to 2022 were analyzed and compared with characteristics of 156 subjects without HO.
resultsThe preoperative radiographs of patients showed a high-grade Brooker, 3 or 4, later reduced to 1 or 2 in the postoperative radiographs. Ten (38.5%) patients underwent radiotherapy prophylaxis, administered as a single dose 24 h before surgery. In 19 (73%) patients, pharmacological prophylaxis with indomethacin was added in the 30 postoperative days. Only one patient who underwent radiotherapy had a recurrence, while new ossifications were found in three patients without prophylaxis (11.5%). Intraoperative cultures were performed for suspected periprosthetic infection in 8 study group patients. In logistic regression, the presence of HO was significantly and inversely associated with the ASA score (OR = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.09-0.82; P = 0.021) after adjusting.
conclusionSurgical HO removal in symptomatic patients with high-grade disease produces good clinical and radiographic results. Radiotherapy was a good perioperative and preventive strategy for recurrence, also associated with NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors.
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.