ArticleCureus2026
Comparison of Fluoroscopy Use Between Two Radiographic Overlay Techniques for Limb Length and Femoral Offset Assessment During Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRestoration of leg length and femoral offset is critical to optimizing outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Several intraoperative techniques are available to assess these parameters when utilizing the direct anterior approach (DAA), many of which rely on fluoroscopy. However, relative radiation exposure associated with these strategies has not been well characterized. This study aims to compare intraoperative radiation exposure between two techniques for limb length and offset assessment during DAA-THA.
methodsA retrospective chart review was conducted of 159 primary cementless DAA-THA procedures performed by a single fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeon using either the contralateral or ipsilateral hip for length and offset reference. Medical records were reviewed to record fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and operative time for each case.
resultsNo statistical difference in fluoroscopy time was noted between contralateral (60.4 ± 21.2 seconds) and ipsilateral (55.9 ± 19.6 seconds) techniques (P = 0.17). Similarly, no statistical difference was noted for radiation exposure between contralateral (15.4 ± 13.3 mGy) and ipsilateral (13.0 ± 9.0 mGy) techniques (P = 0.17). However, when adjusted for operative time and presented as arbitrary units (AU), the ipsilateral technique was associated with less fluoroscopy time (0.34 ± 0.1 AU, P = 0.0025) and radiation exposure (0.08 ± 0.05 AU, P = 0.045) when compared to contralateral fluoroscopy time (0.39 ± 0.1 AU) and radiation exposure (0.1 ± 0.07 AU). Stratified analysis by body mass index (BMI) demonstrated a significant main effect of BMI on radiation exposure (P < 0.001) and operative time (P < 0.001). Regardless of technique, increasing BMI was positively correlated with higher radiation dose (r= 0.52, P < 0.001) and longer operative time (r = 0.42, P < 0.001).
conclusionBoth reference techniques had similar non-adjusted fluoroscopy time and exposure during DAA-THA; however, when normalized by operative time, the ipsilateral technique may require less fluoroscopy. BMI significantly influenced radiation dose and operative duration for both techniques. Ongoing critical evaluation of surgical techniques is essential to optimize safety, particularly when modifications may reduce radiation exposure to patients and operating room personnel.
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.