ArticleCureus2024
Long-Term Outcomes of Cementless Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty in Young Patients With Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: The Impact of Implant Improvements and Preoperative Stage.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Advancements in bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) implants in the mid-1990s contributed to favorable short-term outcomes for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), particularly in cases without acetabular cartilage lesions. Nevertheless, long-term results remain unclear. In this study, we investigated (i) the impact of new-generation BHA implants and (ii) the effect of the preoperative stage on long-term outcomes in young patients with ONFH. Methods The records of consecutive patients with ONFH who underwent cementless BHA were retrospectively reviewed. Patients aged ≥60 years, with <10 years of follow-up, or who underwent acetabular reaming during surgery were excluded. Radiographical and clinical outcomes of patients who received first-generation BHAs and new-generation BHAs (developed after 1998) were compared by stratifying based on preoperative stage 2/3A and 3B/4, according to the Japanese Investigation Committee classification. Results Overall, 50 hips from 39 patients (mean age: 44.6 years; 64% male) with an average follow-up of 18.6 years were included. The frequency of advanced-stage patients was significantly higher in the first-generation BHA group than in the new-generation group. Regarding postoperative outcomes, the first-generation BHA group had higher acetabular erosion grades (p<0.001) and more femoral component loosening than those in the new-generation group (p<0.001). Revisions were performed in eight hips (seven in the first-generation and one in the new-generation BHA groups, p<0.001). In the new-generation BHA group, there were no significant differences in patient background between stage 2/3A and 3B/4 groups, and only one case in the stage 3B/4 group required revision. In the new-generation group, the grade of acetabular erosion was significantly higher for stage 3B/4 than stage 2/3A (p<0.001); other radiographical and clinical outcomes did not differ significantly between stages. Conclusion New-generation BHAs have significantly better implant survival rates for early-stage ONFH than those of first-generation BHAs. These findings indicate that BHA is an acceptable treatment option for early-stage ONFH in young patients.
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.