ArticleArthroplasty today2024
How to Estimate Femoral Stem Anteversion During Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anatomical relationship between the intertrochanteric line and femoral neck osteotomy level in direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: a 3D morphometric and cadaveric validation study.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- Forward.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Femoral Stem Version in Primary Hip Arthroplasty: Challenges and Advances in 3D Planning.JB & JS open accessReview
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: There are various traditional landmarks used to estimate the femoral component version, yet none are widely accepted by direct anterior surgeons. The purpose of this study was to compare bony landmarks easily accessible to direct anterior surgeons and to estimate which one provides the best estimate of femoral component anteversion. Methods: A computed tomography database was used to identify 736 left entire-femur computed tomography scans. Seven visible anatomic landmarks were identified using a computer model in which a 45° virtual neck resection was made at 10 mm above the lesser trochanter. Thirteen axes, to reference the femoral stem position, were created between the 7 landmarks. Means and standard deviations (SDs) of angles between each axis and the transepicondylar axis (TEA) were compared for their precision. Results: The traditional lesser trochanter predicted anteversion from the TEA was 34.1° (SD 9.7°). Predicted anteversion from the TEA was 3.3° (SD 8.1°) when aligned from the center of the canal to the middle of the medial calcar; 14.0° (SD 8.1°) from the center of the canal to the anterior 1/3 of the medial calcar; and 24.8° (SD 8.5°) from the center of the canal to the most anterior point on the medial calcar. Conclusions: Compared to the lesser trochanter, 7 axes were more precise (lower SD) when predicting the version. Estimating the femoral component position, via simulated data, using 3 points along the medial calcar is a relatively precise and easily accessible tool for surgeons.
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.