Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41396367›Full record

SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025

Revision for dislocation and all-causes following primary total hip replacement using 36-mm versus 32-mm femoral heads on polyethylene liners: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Muhamed M Farhan-Alanie, Mina Abdul-Hussein, Daniel Gallacher, Prakrit R Kumar, Rajpreet Sahemey, Peter D H Wall, Michael Blankstein

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Muhamed M Farhan-AlanieUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK. u1874544@live.warwick.ac.uk.
Mina Abdul-HusseinImperial College London, London, UK.
Daniel GallacherUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Prakrit R KumarUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Rajpreet SahemeyUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Peter D H WallUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Michael BlanksteinUniversity of Vermont, Burlington, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe use of a 36-mm femoral head in primary total hip replacement (THR) increases the jump distance and offers a wider impingement-free range of motion, theoretically reducing the risk of post-operative dislocation. However, concerns exist regarding its potentially greater impact on polyethylene wear and associated risks of liner fracture, aseptic loosening, and head-neck taper corrosion, compared to 32-mm femoral heads. This meta-analysis aims to compare the risk of revision for dislocation and all-causes when using 36-mm versus 32-mm metal or ceramic femoral heads with polyethylene liners for primary THR.

methodsMedline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies, while annual reports of arthroplasty registries were searched for relevant data. Random effects meta-analysis was performed. Sensitivity analysis was conducted, limiting to THR performed for osteoarthritis and using cross-linked polyethylene liners, or statistically adjusting for this factor. The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID CRD42024557895).

resultsFour observational studies and two registry reports were identified. Median follow-up ranged from 2.1 to 4.7 years (inter-quartile range values spanned from 0.9 to 7.7 years). The main analyses demonstrated that 36-mm heads were associated with a marginal reduction in the risk of revision for dislocation (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.72–1.01, p = 0.058; n = 241,136) without an increased risk of all-cause revision (HR 1.06, 95%CI 0.95–1.18, p = 0.287; n = 942,617). Similar results were observed in the sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: At early to midterm follow-up, the use of 36-mm heads were not associated with an increased risk of revision for all-causes, compared to 32-mm heads. However, they may offer a protective reduction against revision for dislocation, as a marginal statistically significant reduction was observed, indicating a possible benefit. Further studies investigating these outcomes at longer-term follow up are needed to understand whether these revision risk profiles are maintained.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip DislocationHip ProsthesisPostoperative ComplicationsProsthesis DesignReoperationFemur HeadHumansPolyethyleneProsthesis FailurePolyethyleneDislocationHead sizeLooseningRevisionTHR

Identifiers

PMID41396367
PMCPMC12705727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.