Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41544179›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume2026

Assessment of Custom-Made Acetabular Implants for Complex Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Concise Follow-up, at a Minimum of 5 Years.

Anna Di Laura, Johann Henckel, Alister Hart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Anna Di LauraRoyal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust, Stanmore, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4212-3741
Johann HenckelRoyal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust, Stanmore, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4086-1609
Alister HartRoyal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust, Stanmore, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1281-6886

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the long-term outcomes of 3D-printed, custom-made acetabular implants (CMAIs), expanding on earlier, mid-term findings. Radiographic assessment focused on implant migration and bone ingrowth, and clinical outcomes included survivorship, complications, the mobility score, and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). The median follow-up was 7 years (range, 5 to 9 years). Thirty patients of diverse ethnic backgrounds (21 female; median age of 70 years) were included. Implant migration was limited to the first postoperative year (≤5 mm), with negligible displacement thereafter. Bone ingrowth occurred in 27 (90%) of the patients. The 9-year implant survival rate was 96.3%, with 1 re-revision for infection. The median OHS improved from 8 preoperatively (interquartile range [IQR], 4 to 13) to 32 (IQR, 21 to 37) at the previous, mid-term follow-up (p < 0.0001), and then remained essentially the same at the most recent follow-up. Mobility scores improved by a mean of 1.4 points (p < 0.0001). Two dislocations (in 1 patient), 1 transient sciatic nerve palsy, and recurrent infection in 2 patients were recorded. CMAIs provide durable fixation. Constructs stabilize over time, reflecting osseointegration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

AcetabulumArthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrinting, Three-DimensionalProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureProsthesis-Related Infections

Identifiers

PMID41544179
PMCPMC13166050

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.