ArticleActa orthopaedica2025
Comparison of the CT-based micromotion analysis method versus marker-based RSA in measuring femoral head translation and evaluation of its intra- and interobserver reliability: a prospective agreement diagnostic study on 27 patients up to 1 year.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision of an automated surface-based CT-RSA (asCTRSA) for assessing tibial implant migration: a porcine cadaver study and a clinical case.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- CT-based micromotion analysis for tracking fracture displacement and fragment movement in trochanteric hip fractures: an agreement study.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Inducible displacement CT for implant loosening detection: a scoping review on methods, validation, and challenges.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Precision, Accuracy, and Observer Reliability of Computed Tomography-Based Radiostereometric Analysis in Measuring Femoral Stem Migration In Vitro.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026Article
- Provocation CT-Based Analysis for Diagnosis of Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Aseptic Loosening: Where Are We at? A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeComputed tomography radiostereometric analysis (CT-RSA) assesses implant micromovements using low-dose CT scans. We aimed to investigate whether CT-RSA is comparable to marker-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA) measuring early femoral head migration in cemented stems. We hypothesized that CT-RSA is comparable to marker-based RSA in evaluating femoral head subsidence.
methodsWe prospectively included 31 patients undergoing cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA), of which 27 were eligible for the analysis. Femoral head migration at 1 year was measured with marker-based RSA and CT-RSA. Comparison was performed using paired analysis and Bland-Altman plots, and the intra- and interobserver reliability of CT-RSA was assessed Results: The median (interquartile range [IQR]) translation on the Y-axis measured with marker-based RSA was -0.86 mm (-1.10 to -0.37) and -0.83 mm (-1.11 to -0.48) for CT-RSA (i.e. subsidence), with a median difference of -0.03 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.08 to 0.18). The minimal important difference in translation was set to 0.2 mm. This value was excluded from the CI of the differences. No statistical difference was found between marker-based RSA and CT-RSA regarding assessment of subsidence of the femoral head. The Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the 2 methods in measuring subsidence of the femoral head. The intra- and interobserver reliability of the CT-RSA method was excellent with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 1 (0.99-1) and ICC = 0.99 (0.99-1), respectively.
conclusionWe showed that CT-RSA was comparable to marker-based RSA in measuring femoral head subsidence. Moreover, the intra- and interobserver reliability of the CT-RSA method was excellent, suggesting that the method is assessor independent.
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.