ArticleArthroplasty today2026
Deviation From AI-Predicted Implant Sizes in Total Hip Arthroplasty Is Associated With Increased Complication Risk.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient characteristics may predict implant sizes in total hip arthroplasty (THA), but the clinical value and generalizability of such models remain uncertain. This study evaluated the accuracy and relevance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven prediction tool for THA sizing in a diverse population. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 2410 primary THAs at 2 academic hospitals (2007-2021). Data included patient characteristics, surgical approach, surgeon fellowship training, and complications (periprosthetic femur fracture [PPF], aseptic loosening within 1 year). An AI model predicted femoral stem and acetabular cup sizes using age, sex, height, weight, and race/ethnicity, and these predictions were compared with implanted sizes. In a subset, predictions were compared to traditional radiographic templating. Multivariate analyses assessed associations between size deviation and complications. Results: AI-predicted femoral stems and cups were within one size of implanted components in 72.0% and 77.7% of cases, and within 2 sizes in 91.2% and 94.7%, respectively. Excluding complex cases (dysplasia, avascular necrosis, head collapse, conversion THA) improved accuracy ( Conclusions: A free AI-assisted prediction tool (Mortho) demonstrated strong accuracy and generalizability for implant sizing in primary THA, particularly in standard cases. Predictions mirrored arthroplasty-trained surgeons' selections and outperformed radiographic templating, supporting patient characteristic-based AI as a valuable adjunct for THA planning.
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.