Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22484419›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2013

Revision total knee arthroplasty with varus-valgus constrained prosthesis versus posterior stabilized prosthesis.

Joon Kyu Lee, Sahnghoon Lee, Dongwook Kim, Sang Min Lee, Jak Jang, Sang Cheol Seong, Myung Chul Lee

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Extent of vertical cementing as a predictive factor for radiolucency in revision total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2016
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Factors affecting the osteolysis around the components after posterior-stabilized total knee replacement arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2015
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Joint line changes and outcomes in constrained versus unconstrained total knee arthroplasty for the type II valgus knee.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2013
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joon Kyu LeeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Korea.
Sahnghoon Lee
Dongwook Kim
Sang Min Lee
Jak Jang
Sang Cheol Seong
Myung Chul Lee
Seoul National University Hospital · KRArmed Forces Capital Hospital · KREulji University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aims of this retrospective study were to provide the basis for the choice of prosthesis in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to evaluate the outcome with varus-valgus constrained prosthesis compared with posterior stabilized (PS) prosthesis.

methodsOne hundred and five patients (121 knees) received revision TKA; of which thirty-seven patients (42 knees) received PS prosthesis and sixty-eight patients (79 knees) received varus-valgus constrained prosthesis. The mean follow-up duration was 64.8 ± 31.5 months and 63.2 ± 28.1 months in the PS and varus-valgus constrained groups, respectively. The criterion of prosthesis choice was a subjective laxity assessed by the surgeon intraoperatively. A multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the preoperative factors in the choice of the prosthesis.

resultsThe grade of femoral bone defect was the only factor that affected the choice of prosthesis. Clinical results improved significantly in both groups after surgery. There were no significant differences in clinical results between the two groups. Complication rates were 9.5 % in the PS group and 10.1 % in the varus-valgus constrained group, and the Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis revealed 8-year component survival rates of 83.1 and 93.0 % in the PS and varus-valgus constrained groups, respectively.

conclusionsFemoral bone defect is an important factor to be considered in the choice of prosthesis for revision TKA. The varus-valgus constrained prosthesis showed an outcome similar to that of the PS prosthesis. For clinical relevance, varus-valgus constrained prosthesis is recommended in revision TKA when the PS prosthesis seems unsuitable for the management of instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleHumansJoint DiseasesKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID22484419
OpenAlexW2076938474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.