ReviewAnnals of joint2023
Trabecular titanium cups in hip revision surgery: a systematic review of the literature.
Review in Annals of joint, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A pile foundation reconstruction prosthesis for severe acetabular bone defects : principle, design, and mechanical analysis.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Highly porous 3-D printed tritanium acetabular shell for aseptic revision total hip : Arthroplasty: minimum 2-year prospective follow up of 101 implants.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Trabecular titanium acetabular cup in patients with medial femoral neck fracture: Survivorship analysis and clinical and radiological outcomes.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Article
- The Use of Highly Porous 3-D-Printed Titanium Acetabular Cups in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hip revision surgery in extensive acetabular bone defects represents a complex challenge for hip surgeons. The primary goal is to obtain a stable acetabular component and restore the hip biomechanics. Through the years, different prosthetic implants have been developed to perform acetabular revision depending on bone loss location and extension. This systematic review aims to summarize the clinical outcomes and complications reported with trabecular titanium (TT) cups in hip revision surgery. Methods: A literature search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Database of systematic reviews) was performed according to the PRISMA guideline from January 2008 to December 2022. All studies written in English and reporting the clinical outcome of patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty using Delta TT cups were included. The initial screening identified 378 studies. Each eligible clinical article was analyzed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence (LoE), and the papers' methodological quality was evaluated using The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies Criteria (MINORS) score. Results: Eight clinical studies were included in the analysis. A total of 523 hip revisions were analyzed. Delta TT cups were used in 3.9%, Delta TT one cups in 46.8%, and Delta TT revisions in 49.3%. Paprosky IIIa was the most frequent acetabular bone defect reported in 26.4% of cases. The overall survival rate of TT cups was 93.4%. The dislocation was the most frequent complication in 4.1% of patients, while the prevalence of aseptic loosening was 1.5. Conclusions: Managing severe acetabular bone defects remains a complex challenge for hip surgeons. Since their introduction, TT cups have exhibited good clinical results, with complication rates in line with or lower than those reported by similar implants.
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.