Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39126455›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024

Clinical outcomes and survival rates of a uncemented modular revision stem system in hip arthroplasty: a 10-year single-institution study on a frail population.

Daniele De Meo, Paolo Martini, Beatrice Perciballi, Giovanni Guarascio, Matteo Vacca, Gianluca Cera, Stefano Gumina, Ciro Villani

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniele De MeoDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy. Daniele.demeo@uniroma1.it.
Paolo MartiniDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy.
Beatrice PerciballiDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy.
Giovanni GuarascioDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy.
Matteo VaccaDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy.
Gianluca CeraEmergency Department, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Stefano GuminaDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy.
Ciro VillaniDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic Medicine and Orthopaedics Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 3, Rome, 00161, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe increasing prevalence of primary hip arthroplasty has led to a parallel rise in revision cases. Femoral revision often entails compromised bone integrity, requiring consideration of various solutions for optimal reconstructive options. Despite technological advancements, there is limited evidence on the clinical outcomes of the latest modular revision stems. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and survival rates of next generation uncemented modular revision stem in patients undergoing hip revision surgery. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective single-center study assessed the survival and failure causes of a specific uncemented modular stem in 48 patients undergoing hip revision surgery between 2012 and 2022. Data included preoperative parameters, surgical details, and postoperative outcomes measured through clinical and radiographic assessments. Forty-eight patients (25 males, 23 females; mean age 72 years) were included, with a mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 5. Preoperative diagnoses varied, with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) being the most common (45.8%), followed by periprosthetic fractures (27.1%). Partial revisions occurred in 60.4%, total revisions in 39.6%. According to Paprosky classification of femoral bone loss, type II and III were the most represented, respectively 35.4% and 50%.

resultsAt a mean follow-up of 4.6 years, stem survival was 92.5%. Complications (20%) included dislocation, PJI, fracture, and loosening; the overall reoperation rate was 12.5%. The SF-12 physical score was 43.6, while the mental score was 51.1. The HOOS score was 71.8, and the HHS score was 71.4. Radiographic analysis identified nonprogressive osteolysis in 15.1% of patients.

conclusionsThis study on this uncemented modular revision stem demonstrated favorable outcomes in an elder fragile population with moderate to severe femoral bone loss. The implant's modularity provides versatility in addressing various defects, without any implant breakage observed during the study period. Literature comparison highlighted similar outcomes despite sample size differences. The promising results warrant continued investigation into the long-term survivorship of this modular stem system.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisProsthesis FailureReoperationAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFrail ElderlyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPeriprosthetic FracturesProsthesis DesignRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAseptic looseningComplicationModular hip stemPeriprosthetic fracturePeriprosthetic joint infectionRevision surgeryRevision total hip arthroplastyStemUncemented

Identifiers

PMID39126455
PMCPMC11417061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.