ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
Dual-mobility tripod cup for revision hip arthroplasty: long-term (five to fourteen years) evaluation of a new generation cementless implant.
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.
- Minimum five years outcomes of modular dual mobility in primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.International orthopaedics · 2025Pooled it
- Satisfactory Survivorship and Clinical Outcomes After Acetabular Revision With the Three-Dimensional-Printed Porous Metal Monoblock Dual-Mobility Cup: A Retrospective Case Series With Mean 3 Years Follow-Up.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aims of this study were to evaluate the survivorships of a new generation cementless DMC with tripod additional fixation in revision total hip arthroplasty and complications at a minimum five year follow-up.
methodsOne hundred and fifteen revisions (THA) treated with tripod DMC performed between 2009 and 2015 were included in this retrospective study. Acetabular defects were classified as Paprosky 1 (n = 38, 33%), 2 (n = 75, 65%) or 3 (n = 2, 2%). Unipolar or bipolar revision was performed for the following indications: aseptic acetabular loosening (63%), infection (14%), aseptic bipolar loosening (11%), instability (4%), aseptic femoral loosening (3%), ALVAL (3%) and iliopsoas impingement (2%). Mean follow-up was 9.4 years ± two (range, 5 to 14).
resultsAt the final follow-up, a single episode of dislocation occurred within three months after the procedure (0.8%) with no revision. Three cases of aseptic loosening were diagnosed (2.6%). Four infections (3.5%) required reoperation: three required a two stage bipolar revision; one was treated by DAIR procedure. At the latest follow-up, the survivorship of the acetabular cup for aseptic loosening was 98% [95% CI (91.2-99.4)] and for any reasons was 94.4% [95% CI (90.1%-98.9%)]; the mean HHS improved from 60 points (range, 18-94 points) to 83 points (range, 37-100 points) (p < .001).
conclusionThis study reports a low complication rate in favour of the use of a tripod DMC in revision THA with a satisfactory survivorship at a ten year follow-up.
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.