ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
No differences in clinical and radiographic outcomes between standard versus high offset collared stems for primary total hip arthroplasty at five years follow-up.
Article in International orthopaedics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of propensity-matched patients undergoing THA using standard versus high offset stems at five years.
methodsThe authors retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of primary THAs performed between 01/09/2015-31/12/2017 using a fully-hydroxyapatite coated collared stem, with either a standard (n = 365) or high (n = 110) offset. Outcomes collected included: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and radiographic measurements including limb length discrepancy (LLD), stem subsidence, and stem radiolucencies.
resultsPropensity score matching resulted in 80 hips per group. Preoperatively there were no significant differences in patient demographics, surgical data and radiographic measurements, except the standard offset group had significantly smaller femoral (40.0 ± 7.5 vs 48.4 ± 6.2, p < 0.001), acetabular (92. ± 6.3 vs 94.8 ± 7.3, p = 0.011) and global (132.0 ± 10.3 vs 143.2 ± 8.2, p < 0.001) offsets compared to the high offset group. At a minimum five years follow-up, there were no significant differences in mHHS (93.2 ± 11.0 vs 93.1 ± 10.6, p = 0.553), OHS (45.1 ± 4.1 vs 45.3 ± 4.6, p = 0.623), and FJS (85.1 ± 19.3 vs 82.7 ± 23.0, p = 0.910). There were also no differences in radiographic measurements, including LLD (1.5 ± 4.8 vs 1.1 ± 3.5, p = 0.537), stem subsidence (0% vs 0%, p = 1.000), and stem radiolucencies (severe: 6% vs 1%, p = 0.152).
conclusionThe present matched-cohort study found no significant differences between standard versus high offset straight fully-hydroxyapatite coated collared stems for primary THA in terms of clinical and radiographic outcomes at five years. These findings may suggest that uncemented collared high offset stems are not associated with an increased risk of radiolucencies and loosening compared to uncemented collared standard offset stems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39112838What 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.