ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2023
No significant differences in 60-day postoperative complication rates between conventional and shortened stems.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Agreement of imageless navigation-derived pelvic tilt measurements with radiographic and CT-based measurements in direct anterior total hip arthroplasty: A prospective single-center study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Radiological stability of a quadrangular uncemented femoral component compared with its shortened version in primary total hip arthroplasty : a prospective randomized controlled trial.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Does the transverse acetabular ligament-guided cup anteversion fulfil the functional requirements in total hip arthroplasty?Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Association of spinopelvic mobility and osteosarcopenia with total hip arthroplasty outcomes.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Reduced periprosthetic fracture rate for a cemented anatomical versus a tapered polished stem in hip arthroplasty: A 6-year follow-up of a prospective observational cohort study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- The rise of hip research in theJournal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Epidemiology of hospitalization for hip replacement: Which implications for orthopaedics and rehabilitation? A 15-year longitudinal study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare 60-day complication rates, radiographic outcomes, and clinical outcomes following primary THA with conventional versus shortened stems, in a large cohort study.
methodsThe authors reviewed a consecutive series of 800 primary THAs, of which 781 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria: 395 received a conventional stem and 386 received a shortened stem. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were noted. Radiographic and clinical assessments were performed preoperatively and 60 days after surgery.
resultsCompared to conventional stems, shortened stems had significantly less intraoperative complications (2.8% vs 0.3%, p = 0.006), but no significant differences in complications that did not require reoperation (1.0% vs 1.3%, p = 0.620), complications that required reoperation without stem revision (2.0% vs 1.0%, p = 0.384), and complications that required stem revision (0.5% vs 0.5%, p = 1.000). Four hips (two from each group) required stem revision and were thus excluded from 60-day assessment. There were no significant differences between groups in subsidence ≥ 3 mm (1.0% vs 0.5%, p = 0.686), alignment (90.3%vs 86.7%, p = 0.192), net change in offset (within 3 mm, 32.3% vs 30.5%, p = 0.097), and limb length discrepancy (3.0 ± 2.6 mm vs 2.9 ± 2.4 mm, p = 0.695). Compared to conventional stems, shortened stems had significantly better preoperative mHHS (56.5 ± 18.5 vs 64.5 ± 13.5, p < 0.001), and significantly lower net improvement in mHHS (29.9 ± 17.1 vs 24.4 ± 15.0, p < 0.001), but no significant differences in postoperative mHHS (87.3 ± 11.9 vs 89.4 ± 9.6, p = 0.109).
conclusionsThere were no significant differences between conventional and shortened stems in terms of postoperative complication rates, radiographic outcomes, and postoperative mHHS. However, patients implanted with shortened stems had less intraoperative complications, but lower net improvement in mHHS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Retrospective comparative cohort study.
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.