ArticleArthroplasty today2026
Identification of Combined Anteversion Targets to Optimize Impingement-free Range of Motion Across Femoral Head Sizes: A Simulation Study.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Elevated-rim liner positioning in total hip arthroplasty: a compromise between dislocation biomechanics and range of motion.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dislocation remains a risk following total hip arthroplasty (THA). While prior studies have proposed optimal combined anteversion (CA) ranges to maximize impingement-free range of motion (IFROM), the influence of bony impingement and femoral head size remains underexplored. This study utilized computed tomography-based robotic planning software to identify a target CA that optimized IFROM and to evaluate the effect of head size. Methods: Five patients (mean age: 63.2 years) who underwent robotic-assisted THA were included. Using computed tomography-based planning software, femoral and acetabular version were systematically adjusted from 0° to 37°, simulating bony and implant impingement in flexion and internal rotation and extension and external rotation. Simulations were performed with 28-, 32-, 36-, and 40-mm heads, totaling 57,750 tests. Functional range of motion (ROM) was defined as ≥40° internal rotation at 90° flexion and ≥10° external rotation at 20° extension. For each head size, maximum IFROM and acceptable CA configurations meeting functional ROM criteria were recorded. A mathematical formula was developed to describe optimal CA per head size. Results: For all patients and head sizes, the optimal CA was described by (acetabular anteversion+(0.7×femoral anteversion) = 36 and was independent of native version. Larger femoral heads were associated with broader functional ROM. Acceptable CA angles increased by 158% from 28 to 32 mm, 86% from 32 to 36 mm, and 31% from 36 to 40 mm. Conclusions: Larger femoral head sizes increase IFROM and expand the range of CA positions achieving functional ROM. These findings highlight the importance of head size selection in optimizing IFROM and surgical planning for THA.
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.