ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Head size in Delta ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: a comparative registry study.
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. 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
introductionOptimal bearing size in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been clearly ascertained, but large diameter ceramic balls may improve function and implant stability, with minimal concerns for wear. Delta ceramic-on-ceramic (COC) THA were stratified based on head diameter (32, 36 and 40 mm), aiming to assess: 1) survival rates, reasons for revision and hazard ratios for failure; 2) survival rates and hazard ratios for aseptic loosening, dislocation/primary instability, liner failure. MATERIALS AND
methodsA regional arthroplasty registry was enquired about Delta COC THA performed for primary osteoarthritis, stratified by head size. 13,161 primary cementless THAs were included in the study, with a mean follow-up of 5.7 years (range: 0-17): 3980 (30.2%) 32 mm balls, 8327 (63.3%) 36 mm heads, 854 (6.5%) 40 mm heads.
resultsThe three cohorts achieved similar survival rates (p = 0.99) and adjusted hazard ratios (p > 0.05). No revisions for head breakage or metallosis occurred. When revision for cup aseptic loosening was the endpoint, the survival rates of three cohorts (p = 0.08) and the adjusted hazard ratios (p > 0.05) were similar. The three cohorts achieved comparable survival rates when revision for dislocation/primary instability was the endpoint (p = 0.08). When the endpoint was revision for liner breakage, 32 mm cohort showed higher rates of revision (p = 0.01). No liner failure was detected in the 40 mm cohort.
conclusions32 mm, 36 mm and 40 mm provided similar 10-year survival rates in Delta COC THA. 40 mm heads emerged as safe options but did not lower the revisions for dislocations/primary instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (therapeutic study).
Indexed as
Identifiers
39225803What 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.