ArticleHip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy2026
Is there a place for routine use of cemented acetabular fixation in primary total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis? Equivalence demonstrated in an analysis of 96,574 cases from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
Article in Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
aimThis study utilises Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) data to compare survivorship of total hip arthroplasty (THA) with cemented and cementless acetabular fixation. To minimise confounders, only cases using cemented polished tapered stems with metal heads and highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) liners for primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis were included.
methodsAOANJRR data were analysed from 01 September 1999 to 31 December 2022. The study population included all primary conventional THA performed for osteoarthritis using a cemented polished tapered stem with a bearing surface of metal head articulating with XLPE. These procedures were divided into two groups: procedures with either cemented or cementless acetabular fixation. The analyses were undertaken using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazards models. Results were stratified by age and 3 surgeon volume groups: ⩽10, 10-25, and >25 procedures per surgeon per year.
resultsThere were 96,574 THAs performed for osteoarthritis using a cemented polished tapered stem included. Of these, 5,926 used cemented and 90,648 used cementless acetabular fixation. There was no difference in the rate of revision when cemented acetabular were compared to cementless acetabular procedures (HR 1.01; 95% CI, 0.86-1.18;
conclusionsFor patients undergoing a primary THA for osteoarthritis there is no difference in the rate of revision between cemented or cementless acetabular fixation when utilising a cemented polished stem with modern bearing surfaces. The authors advocate the use of cemented acetabular fixation as a viable alternative and emphasise the need for continued teaching of the skills required to ensure the technique is not lost for future generations of orthopaedic surgeons.
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.