ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2024
Native hip geometry restoration in total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective analysis of eight different short stems.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 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.
- [Short-stem THA-complications and therapy options].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare different types of short stems (SS) in terms of native hip geometry reproducibility, analyzing centrum-collum-diaphyseal angle (CCD) and femoral offset (FO). These parameters allow the SS to be adapted to patient's anatomy in order to ensure better functional outcomes in total hip arthroplasty (THA).
methodsA total of 387 cases of SS met the inclusion criteria. CCD and FO were measured using MediCAD® software Version 6 in preoperative (preop-) and postoperative (postop-) X-rays at 6-12 months after surgery. Considering preop-CCD, the sample was divided into three groups: ≤ 124.9° (A); 125°-129.9° (B); and ≥ 130°(C). Preop- and postop-CCD and FO and the respective average difference (Δ) were examined considering the SS individually and within groups, to verify reproducibility of these parameters.
resultsThe SS considered were eight: Fitmore Zimmer, Pulchra Adler, TRIS Adler, Trifit Corin, Trilock Depuy, Actis Depuy, Profemur Microport, and SMF Smith&Nephew. Groups A, B, and C consisted, respectively, of 113, 124, and 150 cases. Considering all cases, there was a statistically significant (p < 0.05) increase in CCD and FO with surgery. Overall, Trifit and Trilock stems were the best in reproducing preop-CCD, Trifit itself followed by Pulchra and Profemur for preop-FO. In groups A and C, the reproduction of preop-CCD was better than preop-FO, in contrast in group B. With regard to preop-CCD reproduction, in group A Trifit and Pulchra, in group B Fitmore and Trifit, and in group C Fitmore and Pulchra were the best. Fitmore in group A, SMF in group B, Pulchra and Trilock in group C were the worst in reproducing preop-FO.
conclusionEach hip anatomy is unique, and reproduction of preop-CCD and preop-FO can be achieved with different SS characteristics. Accurate knowledge of the stems and performing correct preop- planning are crucial to allow the best restoration of the patient's native hip geometry in THA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39158721What 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.