ArticleActa orthopaedica2024
Stable fixation of an ultra-short femoral neck-preserving hip prosthesis: a 5-year RSA, DXA, and clinical prospective outcome study of 48 patients.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeWe previously showed promising primary stability and preservation of bone stock with the ultra-short neck-loading hip implant in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome, implant stability, and bone mineral density (BMD).
methods50 patients were treated with the ultra-short neck Primoris hip implant at baseline and 48 were available for evaluation at 5-year follow-up. 5 different patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including hip-specific scores, disease-specific and generic quality of life outcome measures, and an activity score were used. Furthermore, implant stability using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) and assessment of periprosthetic BMD using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) were applied.
resultsBy 1-year follow-up, all PROMs showed improvements and remained high at 5-year follow-up. After initial distal translation (subsidence) and negative rotation around the z-axis (varus tilt) the implant showed stable fixation at 5-year follow-up with no further migration beyond 12 months. In the regions of interest (ROI) 3 and 4, BMD remained stable. In ROI 2, further bone loss of 12% was found at 5-year follow-up.
conclusionClinical outcome including PROMs was satisfying throughout the 5-year follow-up period. The hip implant remains stable with both bone preservation and loss 5 years after surgery.
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.