ArticleBone & joint open2025
Management of chronic pelvic discontinuity during revision hip arthroplasty using the 'acetabular distraction technique' : clinical and radiological outcomes from a two-centre study with a minimum two-year follow-up.
Article in Bone & joint open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aims: Chronic pelvic discontinuity (CPD) during revision hip arthroplasty is a challenging entity to address. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes and complications of the 'acetabular distraction technique' for the management of CPD during revision hip arthroplasty. Methods: Patients with CPD, who underwent acetabular revision between January 2014 and April 2022 at two tertiary care centres, using an identical distraction technique, were evaluated. Demographic parameters, preoperative acetabular bone loss, duration of follow-up, clinical and radiological outcomes, and survivorship were evaluated. Results: In all, 46 patients with a mean follow-up of 34.4 months (24 to 120) were available for evaluation. There were 25 male (54.3%) and 21 female (45.7%) patients, with a mean age of 58.1 years (40 to 81) at the time of revision surgery. Based on the Paprosky classification for acetabular bone loss, 19 (41.3%), 12 (26.1%), and 15 (32.6%) patients had type IIIB, IIIA, and IIC defects, respectively. All patients were managed using the Trabecular Metal Acetabular Revision System; 16 patients required additional Trabecular Metal augments. The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 50.1 (34.3 to 59.8) preoperatively to 86.6 (74.8 to 91.8) at the last follow-up (p < 0.001). Of the 46 patients studied, 34 were able to walk unaided, whereas 12 required a walking stick. Two patients (4.3 %) developed partial sciatic nerve palsy, two (4.3%) had posterior dislocation, and one (2.2%) required re-revision for aseptic loosening. Radiologically, 36 patients (78.3%) showed healing of the pelvic discontinuity through bony bridging. The overall cup survivorship was 97.8%, while the three-year survivorship free from any re-revision was 94.1% based on a Kaplan-Meier survival plot. Conclusion: The acetabular distraction technique results in good clinical and radiological outcomes in the management of CPD during revision hip arthroplasty.
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.