Copyright
©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Orthop. Aug 18, 2023; 14(8): 630-640
Published online Aug 18, 2023. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v14.i8.630
Published online Aug 18, 2023. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v14.i8.630
Table 3 Patient’s demographics
| Ref. | Gender M | Age (SD) | Follow up in years (SD) |
| Tyson et al[39], 2021 | Uncemented 318 (53%), cemented 138 (52%) | Uncemented 72 (10), cemented 74 (9) | Uncemented 4 (3), cemented 5 (3) |
| Weiss et al[38], 2011 | Uncemented 443 (55%), cemented 544 (51%) | Uncemented 72 (11), cemented 76 (9) | Uncemented 3.4 (2.9), cemented 4.2 (2.5) |
| Iorio et al[6], 2008 | 22 cemented (51%), 22 uncemented (51%) | Uncemented 71.2 (9), cemented 67.5 (10) | Uncemented 7 (1), cemented 9 (1.5) |
- Citation: Elbardesy H, Anazor F, Mirza M, Aly M, Maatough A. Cemented versus uncemented stems for revision total hip replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Orthop 2023; 14(8): 630-640
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v14/i8/630.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v14.i8.630