ArticleHip & pelvis2025
Preoperative Templating in Hip Resurfacing: Impact on Implant Sizing and Component Positioning.
Article in Hip & pelvis, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Over the past decade, hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) has seen a resurgence in popularity due to an increased success rate attributed to numerous novel techniques. Preoperative digital templating is an effective technique that overcomes the technical difficulties of HRA. However, literature on this technique is sparse. Our study aims to fill this void by exploring the impact of preoperative digital templating on implant sizing and component positioning in hip resurfacing surgeries. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients operated with HRA from 2019 to 2024 in our institution (Hôpital Nord, Marseille). Pre- and postoperative data were collected to determine the size of the implants and their positioning on preoperative templates and postoperative X-rays. Results: There was no difference in the optimal positioning of implants and the same leg-length discrepancy when individuals with intraoperative changes in implant size from the templates were compared to those with templates that were identical to the postoperative implant sizes. No correlation was found between the changes in the size of the implants and covariates, such as age, side, body mass index, and etiology of the disease. Conclusion: This study highlights the need for intraoperative adjustments of the implant size and optimal positioning during a hip resurfacing surgery, taking into account the crucial information revealed by a preoperative digital templating to optimize the success rate.
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.