Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39634575›Full record

ReviewJournal of experimental orthopaedics2024

Use of morselized bone allograft in revision hip arthroplasty for massive acetabular defect: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pietro Cimatti, Nicolandrea Del Piccolo, Benedetta Dallari, Alessandro Mazzotta, Dante Dallari

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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.

Pietro CimattiReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli Bologna Italy.ORCID 0009-0002-2478-9395
Nicolandrea Del PiccoloReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli Bologna Italy.
Benedetta DallariReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli Bologna Italy.
Alessandro MazzottaReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli Bologna Italy.
Dante DallariReconstructive Orthopaedic Surgery Innovative Techniques-Musculoskeletal Tissue Bank IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli Bologna Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Many treatment options are available for the revision of large acetabular defects. Debate continues as to which technique is most effective. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the rates of failure of acetabular bone defects Paprosky type III or American Academy of Orthopaedic types III-IV treated with morselized allograft in association with cemented cup or cementless cup or reinforcement devices. Methods: The US National Library of Medicine (PubMed/MEDLINE), EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried for publications from January 1980 to 1 April 2024 utilizing keywords pertinent to total hip arthroplasty (THA), acetabular impaction bone grafting and revision THA. The main outcome measure was the 9-year implant failure rate. Results: Thirty-nine articles were eligible for inclusion in the current study. We found 41 treatment approaches that we grouped into three different treatment options: 1 = morselized allograft and cemented cup (10 studies); 2 =morselized allograft and cementless cup (nine studies); 3 = morselized allograft and device (22 studies). The overall implant failure rate was 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6%-2.8%) at a mean of 9.2 years. There was no significant difference in failure rates between different treatment options (1.6% [95% CI, 0.9%-2.6%]) for morselized allograft and cemented cup; 2.1% (95% CI, 1.4%-3.2%) for morselized allograft and cementless cup; 2.5% (95% CI, 1.7%-3.7%) for morselized allograft and device) between the three different types of treatment (heterogeneity between groups Conclusions: The use of morselized allograft in hip revision of large acetabular defects has low implant failure rates, independently of the associated type of implant. Reinforcement devices increase the risk of re-revision for infection and dislocation. Level of Evidence: Level III.

Indexed as

acetabular defecthipmorselized allograft

Identifiers

PMID39634575
PMCPMC11615971

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.