ArticleArthroplasty today2025
Single-Institution Experience With Nononcologic Total Femoral Replacement.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Total femur replacement: function, quality of life, and gait: a multicentric EMSOS study.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026Article
- Total femoral replacement for oncologic indications: Functional outcomes, complications, and implant survival rates.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Revision hip and knee arthroplasty volume continues to rise, and total femur replacement (TFR) remains a key salvage option in patients with extensive bone loss. Prior research has demonstrated mixed results of this procedure, and this study aimed to characterize the outcomes of nononcologic TFR in one of the largest single-center modern series. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 23 nononcologic TFR procedures performed on 22 patients between 2012 and 2021. Primary outcomes included TFR revision rate and indication for revision, while secondary outcomes included overall reoperation rate, complications, patient ambulatory status, and assistive device requirements. Results: The average age at time of TFR was 65.7 years, with periprosthetic fracture (65.2%) and periprosthetic joint infection (34.8%) as predominant indications. More than half of patients (52.2%) required TFR revision, primarily due to periprosthetic joint infection (75.0%). Despite a high complication profile, only 1 patient underwent limb amputation and there was only 1 mortality during the study period. Overall, 63.6% of patients were ambulating (assisted or unassisted) at final follow-up. Conclusions: Nononcologic TFR remains a viable limb-salvage option for patients undergoing revision arthroplasty with extensive bone loss. Despite a notable revision rate and infection risk, the majority of patients maintain or regain ambulatory function, emphasizing the procedure's role in preserving limb function. Clinicians should weigh potential complications when considering TFR, emphasizing patient counseling and risk mitigation strategies.
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.