Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22676495›Full record

Trial reportBMC research notes2012

A randomized controlled trial comparing patellar retention versus patellar resurfacing in primary total knee arthroplasty: 5-10 year follow-up.

Lauren Beaupre, Charles Secretan, D W C Johnston, Guy Lavoie

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC research notes, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01500252 (A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Patellar Resurfacing Versus Patellar Retention in Total Knee Arthroplasty Using the PROFIX* Total Knee System), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01500252 phase4completednot on this map

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Patellar Resurfacing Versus Patellar Retention in Total Knee Arthroplasty Using the PROFIX* Total Knee System

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of AlbertaRan1996 to 2009Enrolled38ConditionsTotal Knee ReplacementArmsPatellar Replacement Prosthesis, Profix TKR with Patellar Retention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Patellofemoral resurfacing and patellar denervation in primary total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2015
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Patellar complications following total knee arthroplasty: a review of the current literature.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019
    Review
  18. [A comparative study on effectiveness of patellar resurfacing against non-resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Lauren Beaupre2-50 Corbett Hall, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2 G4, Canada. lbeaupre@ualberta.ca
Charles Secretan
D W C Johnston
Guy Lavoie

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe primary purpose of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to compare knee-specific outcomes (stiffness, pain, function) between patellar retention and resurfacing up to 10 years after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Secondarily, we compared re-operation rates.

methods38 subjects with non-inflammatory arthritis were randomized at primary TKA surgery to receive patellar resurfacing (n = 21; Resurfaced group) or to retain their native patella (n = 17; Non-resurfaced group). Evaluations were performed preoperatively, one, five and 10 years postoperatively by an evaluator who was blinded to group allocation. Self-reported knee-specific stiffness, pain and function, the primary outcomes, were measured by the Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Revision rate was determined at each evaluation and through hospital record review.

results30 (88%) and 23 (72%) of available subjects completed the five and 10-year review respectively. Knee-specific scores continued to improve for both groups over the 10-years, despite diminishing overall health with no significant group differences seen. All revisions occurred within five years of surgery (three Non-resurfaced subjects; one Resurfaced subject) (p = 0.31). Two revisions in the Non-resurfaced group were due to persistent anterior knee pain.

conclusionsWe found no differences in knee-specific results between groups at 5-10 years postoperatively. The Non-resurfaced group had two revisions due to anterior knee pain similar to rates reported in other studies. Knee-specific results provide useful postoperative information and should be used in future studies comparing patellar management strategies. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01500252.

Indexed as

AgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatellaPatient SatisfactionPostoperative PainReoperation

Identifiers

PMID22676495
PMCPMC3532201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.