ReviewArthroplasty (London, England)2024
What is the clinical utility of acoustic and vibrational analyses in uncemented total hip arthroplasty?
Review in Arthroplasty (London, England), 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite recent developments in THA, a more objective method is needed to assist orthopedic surgeons in identifying the insertion endpoint of the broaching procedure. Therefore, this systematic review evaluated the in-vivo efficacy of various acoustic and vibration analyses in detecting proper implant seating, identifying intraoperative complications, and quantifying the accuracy of predictive modeling using acoustics.
methodsFour electronic databases were searched on July 23rd, 2023, to retrieve articles evaluating the use of acoustic analysis during THA. The search identified 835 unique articles, which were subsequently screened by two independent reviewers as per our inclusion and exclusion criteria. In total, 12 studies evaluating 580 THAs were found to satisfy our criteria and were included in this review.
resultsMethodologically, analyses have suggested stopping broaching when consecutive blows emit similar acoustic profiles (maximum peak frequency ± 0.5 kHz), which indicates proper implant seating in terms of stability and mitigates subsidence. Also, abrupt large deviations from the typical progression of acoustic signals while broaching are indicative of an intraoperative fracture. Since height, weight, femoral morphological parameters, and implant type have been shown to alter acoustic emissions while hammering, incorporating these factors into models to predict subsidence or intraoperative fracture yielded virtually 100% accuracy in identifying these adverse events.
conclusionThese findings support that acoustic analyses during THA show promise as an accurate, objective, and non-invasive method to predict and detect proper implant fixation as well as to identify intraoperative fractures.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration of the study protocol: CRD42023447889, 23 July 2023.
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.