ArticleMusculoskeletal surgery2025
Multicenter survey about leg length discrepancy and total hip arthroplasty: postoperative management.
Article in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe created a Multicenter Survey for Italian orthopedics surgeons on how they approach leg length discrepancy when dealing with primary total hip arthroplasty. Aim of the study was to show how surgeons manage LLD and follow literature recommendations during clinical practice.
methodsThe Survey was composed of 25 questions divided in 4 sections: surgeon's profile, preoperative and intraoperative evaluation, postoperative management. In this paper, we report the absolute and relative frequencies of answers to section on "postoperative management." Then, regarding the treatment of residual LLD, we reported whether trauma surgeons and experts in replacement surgery had higher odds ratios for providing "literature-based" answers compared to orthopedics physicians.
resultsOnly four questions received more than 70% agreement on one of the answers. The OR for giving the "literature-based" answer, taking OP as the reference group was 1.57 for TR and 1.72 for RS for 10 mm LLD at first follow-up (FU) and 1.23 TR and 1.32 RS when 20 mm. When 10 mm LLD at 3 months FU the OR was 0.88 TR and 1.15 RS. The OR for treatment of LLD after the first examination of a new patient was 2.16 TR and 1.85 RS.
conclusionsLLD is a debated topic with no definitive recommendations. Many decisions still depend on tradition. Treatment of LLD during clinical practice often differs from literature recommendations.
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.