ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Learning curve comparison between switching approach and switching implant in cementless short stem total hip arthroplasty.
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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lessons from the learning curve of the direct anterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Review
- Evaluating the learning curve and outcomes of a new rectangular femoral stem in total hip arthroplasty: A comparative study.Journal of orthopaedics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionImplementing new approaches or new implants is always related with a certain learning curve in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Currently, many surgeons are switching to minimally invasive approaches combined with short stems for performing THA. Therefore, we aimed to asses and compare the learning curve of switching from an anterolateral Watson Jones approach (ALA) to a direct anterior approach (DAA) with the learning curve of switching from a neck-resecting to a partially neck-sparing short stem in cementless THA. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe first 150 consecutive THA performed through a DAA (Group A) and the first 150 consecutive THA using a partially neck-sparing short stem (Group B) performed by a single surgeon were evaluated within this retrospective cohort study. All cases were screened for surgery related adverse events (AE). Furthermore, the operative time of each surgery was evaluated and the learning curve assessed performing a cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.
resultsOverall, significantly more AE occurred in Group A compared to Group B (18.0% vs. 10.0%; p = 0.046). The sub-analysis of the AE revealed higher rates of periprosthetic joint infections (2.7% vs. 0.7%; p = 0.176), periprosthetic fractures (4.0% vs. 2.0%; p = 0.310) and overall revisions (4.7% vs. 1.3% p = 0.091) within Group A without statistical significance. The CUSUM analysis revealed a consistent reduction of operative time after 97 cases in Group A and 79 cases in Group B.
conclusionA significantly higher overall rate of AE was detected while switching approach compared to switching implant for performing THA. However, according to the results of this study, surgeons should be aware of the learning curve of the adoption to a new implant with different fixation philosophy as well.
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.