ArticleLa Tunisie medicale2025
Article in La Tunisie medicale, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is an effective surgical procedure. Several surgical approaches have been described.
aimTo compare postero-lateral and anterior approaches in terms of postoperative care, functional and radiological outcomes in patients undergoing primary THA surgery.
methodsPatients undergoing primary THA were included in a retrospective descriptive study and divided into two groups according to surgical approach: anterior approach (AA) and postero-lateral approach (PLA). We compared demographic, perioperative data and functional outcome at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively according to Postel Merle d'Aubigné (PMA) and Harris (HHS) scores, radiological positioning of implants and postoperative complications.
resultsEach group comprised 100 patients. In the AA group, operative time was shorter, patients had less pain, less bleeding and a shorter hospital stay, better PMA and Harris scores at six weeks post-operatively, with no difference at six months, better positioning of the acetabular cup, undersizing of the femoral stem and more iatrogenic fractures of the proximal femur. Patients in the PLA group had fewer skin and nerve complications and more prosthetic instability.
conclusionCurrent data do not demonstrate superiority of one approach over another in primary THA. We recommend the choice of surgical approach according to the patient's characteristics and surgeons' convictions.
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.