ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026
Good mid- to long-term survivorship and low rates of aseptic loosening of a cementless primary press-fit acetabular cup for contained defects in revision total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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.
- Good mid- to long-term survivorship and low rates of aseptic loosening of a cementless primary press-fit acetabular cup for contained defects in revision total hip arthroplasty.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Acetabular revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) remains challenging, and evidence on the use of primary press-fit cups in the revision setting for contained acetabular defects is limited. This study evaluated mid- to long-term implant survivorship, reoperation rates and clinical and radiographic outcomes of a cementless primary press-fit acetabular cup used for acetabular revision. Methods: This retrospective single-centre study included 107 hips in 106 patients undergoing acetabular rTHA using a cementless primary press-fit cup. Implant survivorship was assessed using cumulative incidence functions for acetabular re-revision for any reason, re-revision for aseptic loosening and reoperation for any reason, with death treated as a competing event. Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to evaluate potential risk factors. Patient-reported outcome measures included the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score. Radiographic evaluation was performed using standardised classifications. Results: Cumulative incidence of acetabular re-revision for any reason was 5.9% at 5 years and 9.8% at 10 years. Re-revision for aseptic loosening occurred in two hips (1.9%), corresponding to survivorship of 99.0% at 5 years and 95.0% at 10 years. The cumulative incidence of reoperation for any reason was 21.7% at 10 years. Previous revision surgery was the only factor associated with an increased risk of subsequent failure. Mean HHS increased from 47 to 76, and the median UCLA activity score from 4 to 6. No radiographic acetabular loosening was observed among patients available for radiographic follow-up. Conclusion: In selected acetabular revision cases with contained defects, cementless primary press-fit acetabular cups demonstrated favourable mid- to long-term implant survivorship. Postoperative functional outcomes were comparable to those reported in the existing revision THA literature. Aseptic loosening accounted for only a minority of failures, suggesting durable biological fixation in this revision setting. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.
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.