Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Orthop. Feb 18, 2017; 8(2): 192-207
Published online Feb 18, 2017. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v8.i2.192
Published online Feb 18, 2017. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v8.i2.192
Figure 1 Study selection algorithm.
Figure 2 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs cementless: Revision of any component due to any reason.
Figure 3 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs cementless: Revision of any component due to aseptic loosening.
Figure 4 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs cementless: Revision of any component due to infection.
Figure 5 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs cementless: Dislocation of any component.
Figure 6 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs hybrid: Revision of any component due to any reason.
Figure 7 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs hybrid: Revision of any component due to aseptic loosening.
Figure 8 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs hybrid: Revision of any component due to infection.
Figure 9 Forest plot of comparison: Cemented vs hybrid: Dislocation of any component.
Figure 10 Forest plot of comparison: Cementless vs hybrid: Revision of any component due to any reason.
Figure 11 Forest plot of comparison: Cementless vs hybrid: Revision of any component due to infection.
Figure 12 Forest plot of comparison: Cementless vs hybrid: Revision of any component due to infection.
Figure 13 Forest plot of comparison: Cementless vs hybrid: Dislocation of any component.
Figure 14 Funnel plot of comparison of revision of any component (A) cementless vs cementless; (B) cemented vs hybrid; (C) cementless vs hybrid.
- Citation: Phedy P, Ismail HD, Hoo C, Djaja YP. Total hip replacement: A meta-analysis to evaluate survival of cemented, cementless and hybrid implants. World J Orthop 2017; 8(2): 192-207
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v8/i2/192.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v8.i2.192