Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37861705›Full record

ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2024

[Cement in revision arthroplasty-what about the "glacier effect"? : Case studies viewed from different perspectives].

Thelonius Hawellek, Gabriela von Lewinski, Wolfgang Lehmann, Klaus-Dieter Kühn

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. [Periprosthetic fractures of the knee : Revision arthroplasty].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
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

4 authors.

Thelonius HawellekKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Orthopädie und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland. thelonius.hawellek@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Gabriela von LewinskiKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Orthopädie und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland.
Wolfgang LehmannKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Orthopädie und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Deutschland.
Klaus-Dieter KühnUniversitätsklinik für Orthopädie und Orthopädische Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Graz, Graz, Österreich.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of operations concerning revision arthroplasty has been increasing continuously in recent years, and it can be assumed that they will continue to increase in the future. If an arthroplasty implant becomes loose, it must be changed. The question often arises as to how the new implant should be fixed in the bone. ADVANTAGES: Revision implants can be inserted into the bone without cement. In the subsequent period, a secondary osseointegration of the implant takes place. Another possibility is to anchor the implant by using bone cement. The advantage of cemented anchorage is that the implant is firmly fixed in the bone, in principle, immediately, and it is possible to fully load the implant directly. Direct postoperative full weight bearing is helpful, especially for older and multimorbid patients, in order to achieve rapid mobilization. PREREQUISITES AND CHALLENGES: When using cement in revision cases, however, there are a few prerequisites and challenges that the surgeon should definitely take into account. In the case of revision, the bone in the former implant bed is often deficient and appears thinned and sclerosed. It is, therefore, important to analyze the bone quality preoperatively on radiographic images and to include it in the planning of the anchoring strategy. In addition, the individual bone quality of the patient must also be taken into account intraoperatively. In any case, it must be clarified whether the basic prerequisites for the sufficient bond strength of the cement with the bone to be formed can still be met. Furthermore, the principles of cementing technique must be strictly observed, and the goal of a perfect cement mantle must be aimed for. If the indication for this is overstated, early loosening of the cemented revision arthroplasty is very likely.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipBone CementsCementationHumansIce CoverProsthesis FailureBone CementsBone cementJoint replacementOsseointegrationProsthesis looseningRevision surgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.