ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
The role of femoral head size in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: analysis of a cohort of 3813 patients with long term follow-up.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inflammatory Pseudotumor After Total Hip Arthroplasty-An Increasingly Recognized Complication.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Review
- Femoral Neck Fracture Management in Elderly Patients: Surgeons' Practice Through a Registry Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Incorrect acetabular cup positioning in a MoM THA: an announced failure with growth of bulky pseudotumour. A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 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
Metal-on-metal (MoM) large headed arthroplasties were suggested to decrease failure rates by means of reduced volumetric wear and enhanced implant stability. However, they caused high rates of revisions due to adverse reaction to metal debris, osteolysis, pseudotumor growth, and other issues. The study aims to present the long-term outcomes of MoM arthroplasties on a large cohort of patients, evaluating the impact of head sizes on survival rate. All data were retrieved from the regional joint register (Registro dell'Implantologia Protesica Ortopedica, RIPO, Italy). We include in the study all patient who underwent cementless MoM total hip arthroplasties (THAs) between 2000 and 2020, dividing them in two subgroups according to head size (<36 mm, ≥36 mm). Failures were recorded up to December 31, 2020. Patients lost to follow-up were excluded. A total of 3813 THAs met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The average follow-up period is 12.4 years (0-21 years). 178/1625 (or 11.0%) small head MoM THAs and 265/2188 large head ones failed by the end of follow up. Large diameter heads reported lower survival rate (p-value < 0.001), with unexpected higher dislocation rate (1.0 vs. 0.4%). Moreover, large head size was found to increases the risk of metallosis (p-value < 0.0001). Gender, patient's age and the use of modular neck were not correlated with higher failure rates. MoM implants implants do not have the same reliability as other couplings, considering the significantly greater failure/complication rates. However, the knowledge of risks linked to head size is fundamental for establishing the right type of follow-up to the patient and recognize any complications early.
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.