ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
Do all short stem types restore biomechanical parameters of the hip? Comparison according to femoral neck osteotomy levels.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of minimally invasive and standard posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty for Crowe type 2 dysplastic coxarthrosis: clinical, radiographic, and functional outcomes.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is no consensus on ideal short femoral stem design. A classification system proposed by Feyen and Shimmin divides short stems in two types according to femoral neck osteotomy levels: subcapital (IIIA) and standard (IIIB). The study aims to determine which design type is more successful in restoring native biomechanical parameters and whether stem type has an impact on clinical results.
methodsIn this retrospective comparative study, patients that have undergone short stem hip arthroplasty were evaluated according to stem types: type IIIA (n = 52, 66.7%) (Mathys Optimys) and IIIB (n = 26, 33.3%) (Implantcast Aida and Smith & Nephew SMF). Pelvis X-rays were assessed in terms of femoral neck length, horizontal and vertical hip centres of rotation, horizontal and vertical femoral offsets, abductor lever arm lengths, leg lengths, and stem-shaft angles. Improvement in Harris hip scores, differences between post-operative and pre-operative measurements, and stem-shaft angles were evaluated and compared between two groups.
resultsMean femoral neck resection (8.27 ± 6.68 mm in IIIA and 15 ± 6.33 mm in IIIB) was significantly different between both groups (p < 0.001). Harris hip scores were increased at post-operative six months in both groups with no difference (84.4 ± 6.4 and 84.6 ± 5.5, p = 0.4). The absolute values of differences between pre-operative and post-operative horizontal centres of rotation (p = 0.63), vertical centers of rotation (p = 0.75), horizontal femoral offsets (p = 0.78), vertical femoral offsets (p = 0.83), abductor lever arm distances (p = 0.63), and leg length (p = 0.21) measurements were not different between both groups. Stem positions were both varus with no statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0.14).
conclusionWe found no difference regarding restoration of biomechanical parameters between short stem designs with different levels of neck osteotomy. Additionally, short stem can mostly result in varus component positioning regardless of the level of neck osteotomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38589708What 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.