Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39354712›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society2025

Evaluation of conventional and CT-based radiostereometric analysis for inducible displacement measurements after total hip arthroplasty.

Jennifer S Polus, Bart L Kaptein, Edward M Vasarhelyi, Brent A Lanting, Matthew G Teeter

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Current Uses for Medical Imaging With Orthopaedic Implant Technology.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Evaluation of conventional and CT-based radiostereometric analysis for inducible displacement measurements after total hip arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Jennifer S PolusSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2070-0253
Bart L KapteinDepartment of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Edward M VasarhelyiDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9942-9605
Brent A LantingDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Matthew G TeeterDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3911-3171

Funding

The Arthritis Society Stars Career Development Award 22-0000000053
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is the gold standard for migration tracking, computed tomography-based RSA (CT-RSA) does not require marker beads and is available for clinical adoption. This study investigated CT-RSA in comparison to RSA for assessing hip implant stability with inducible displacement (ID) examinations. Patients (n = 48) from a previous study returned to be re-examined for femoral stem stability with CT-RSA and RSA imaging. Implant migration since patients last follow-up was calculated as a measure of stability. ID was assessed between alternated leg rotation scans for CT-RSA and between supine and weight-bearing scans for RSA. Measurements from ID and double examinations were compared between CT-RSA and RSA. All stems were well-fixed with migration <0.2 mm/year. ID measurements were lower with CT-RSA than RSA for distal translation (mean difference = 0.122 mm, p < 0.0001), total translation (mean difference = 0.158 mm, p < 0.0001), and total rotation (mean difference = 0.449°, p < 0.0001). The ID and double exam were significantly different for total translation and total rotation for CT-RSA, and significantly different for medial, distal, and total translation, and total rotation for RSA. Precision ranged from 0.049 to 0.130 mm in translation and 0.061° to 0.220° in rotation for CT-RSA, and from 0.108 to 0.269 mm in translation and 0.151° to 0.670° in rotation for RSA. ID measurements from both CT-RSA and RSA were minimal, consistent for a cohort with well-fixed stems. CT-RSA demonstrated superior precision in all axes compared to RSA. Clinical Significance: Future work should explore the use of CT-RSA in patients with suspected loosening as a potential diagnostic tool.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipRadiostereometric AnalysisTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHip ProsthesisHumansMaleMiddle AgedProsthesis Failureaseptic looseningcomputed tomographycorail stemimplant migration

Identifiers

PMID39354712
PMCPMC11615423

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.