ArticleEFORT open reviews2024
Outcomes of total hip arthroplasty using collared versus collarless uncemented HA-coated stems: a meta-analysis.
Article in EFORT open reviews, 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.
- Collared Femoral Stems Have Lower Risk of Postoperative PPFs After THA: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Uncemented total hip arthroplasty in patients with systemic malignancy without skeletal involvement: A retrospective case series.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- No differences in clinical and radiographic outcomes between standard versus high offset collared stems for primary total hip arthroplasty at five years follow-up.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: to systematically review comparative studies reporting revision rates, clinical outcomes, or radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) using collared versus collarless conventional-length uncemented hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated stems. Methods: In adherence with PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was performed on Medline, Embase, and Scopus. Comparative clinical studies were eligible if they reported outcomes of collared versus collarless uncemented HA-coated stems for primary THA. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to determine eligibility; then performed data extraction; and assessed the quality of studies according to Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. Results: The search returned 972 records, 486 were duplicates, and 479 were excluded after title/abstract/full-text screening. Three further studies were included from the references of eligible studies and from discussions with subject matter experts, resulting in 11 included studies. The JBI checklist indicated six studies scored ≥7 points and four studies ≥4 points. Pooled data revealed collared stems had significantly lower revision rates (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.31-0.64) and subsidence (MD = -1 mm; 95% CI = -1.6--0.3), but no significant difference in intraoperative complication rates (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.67-1.32) in the short term to mid-term. Unpooled data indicated that collared stems provide equivalent survival, equivalent or better outcomes, and equivalent or lower complication rates. Conclusion: In comparative studies, collared stems have lower revision rates than collarless stems, as well as equivalent or better clinical and radiographic outcomes. Differences could be due to a protective effect that the collar offers against subsidence, particularly in undersized or misaligned stems. Further studies are warranted to confirm long-term results and better understand differences between registry data and clinical studies.
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.