ArticleBone & joint open2026
Evaluating fixation and bone graft integration at two years post-surgery in uncemented acetabular revisions with large amounts of allograft bone.
Article in Bone & joint open, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum to treat segmental and cavitary defects has been shown to be successful for uncemented acetabular revisions. Concerns remain about graft integration and implant stability when severe bone defects require large amounts of bone graft. This study evaluates bone graft density and implant migration in patients undergoing uncemented acetabular revision with screw fixation and impaction bone grafting using large bone graft volumes. Methods: In this exploratory study, nine patients undergoing acetabular revision surgery were evaluated to assess bone graft volume, bone mineral density (BMD), and implant migration using dual-energy CT and CT-based micromotion analysis, performed directly postoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up. Results: The mean volume of bone graft used was 64.0 cm Conclusion: Uncemented acetabular revisions using large allograft volumes exhibit a migration pattern that is consistent with other revision techniques. Despite the large amount of bone graft used, bone density increases over time.
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.