Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38577201›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of methodology2024

Technical note for intraoperative determination of proper acetabular cup size in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Panagiotis Karampinas, John Vlamis, Athanasios Galanis, Michail Vavourakis, Anastasia Krexi, Evangelos Sakellariou, Christos Patilas, Spiros Pneumaticos

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Panagiotis Karampinas3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
John Vlamis3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
Athanasios Galanis3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
Michail Vavourakis3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece. michail.vavourakis@outlook.com.
Anastasia Krexi3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
Evangelos Sakellariou3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
Christos Patilas3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
Spiros Pneumaticos3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, KAT General Hospital, Athens 14561, Greece.
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelecting the optimal size of components is crucial when performing a primary total hip arthroplasty. Implanting the accurate size of the acetabular component can occasionally be exacting, chiefly for surgeons with little experience, whilst the complications of imprecise acetabular sizing or over-reaming can be potentially devastating.

aimTo assist clinicians intraoperatively with a simple and repeatable tip in elucidating the ambivalence when determining the proper acetabular component size is not straightforwardly achieved, specifically when surgeons are inexperienced or preoperative templating is unavailable.

methodsThis method was employed in 263 operations in our department from June 2021 to December 2022. All operations were performed by the same team of joint reconstruction surgeons, employing a typical posterior hip approach technique. The types of acetabular shells implanted were: The Dynasty

resultsThe mean value of all cases was calculated and collated with each other. We distinguished as oversized an implanted acetabular shell when its size was > 2 mm larger than the size of the acetabular size indicator reamer (ASIR) or when the implanted shell was larger than 4 mm compared to the preoperative planned cup. The median size of the implanted acetabular shell was 52 (48-54) mm, while the median size of the preoperatively planned cup was 50 (48-56) mm, and the median size of the ASIR was 52 (50-54) mm. The correlation coefficient between ASIR size and implanted acetabular component size exhibited a high positive correlation with

conclusionIn our study, we demonstrated that the size of the first acetabular reamer not entering freely in the acetabular rim corroborates the final acetabular component size to implant. This was also corresponding in the majority of the cases with conventional preoperative templating. It can be featured as a valid tool for avoiding the potentially pernicious complications of acetabular cup over-reaming and over-sizing in primary total hip arthroplasty. It is a simple and reproducible technical note useful for confirming the predicted acetabular cup size preoperatively; thus, its application could be considered routinely, even in cases where preoperative templating is unavailable.

Indexed as

Acetabular componentAcetabular shellAcetabulumHipPrimary hip arthroplastyTotal hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID38577201
PMCPMC10989413
OpenAlexW4392558019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.