Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23124601›Full record

Trial reportKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2014

No difference in anterior knee pain between a fixed and a mobile posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty after 7.9 years.

Stefan J M Breugem, Bas van Ooij, Daniël Haverkamp, Inger N Sierevelt, C Niek van Dijk

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. No difference between mobile and fixed bearing in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty reproduces native patellofemoral biomechanics during deep knee flexion.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Stefan J M BreugemOrthopedic Research Center Amsterdam, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, s.j.breugem@amc.uva.nl.
Bas van Ooij
Daniël Haverkamp
Inger N Sierevelt
C Niek van Dijk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe presence of anterior knee pain remains one of the major complaints following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Since the introduction of the mobile TKA, many studies have been performed and only a few show a slight advantage for the mobile. In our short-term follow-up study, we found less anterior knee pain in the posterior stabilized mobile knees compared to the posterior stabilized knees. The concept of self-alignment and the results from our short-term study led us to form the hypothesis that the posterior stabilized mobile knee leads to a lower incidence of anterior knee pain compared to the posterior stabilized fixed knee. This study was designed to see whether this difference remains after 7.9 years in the follow-up. A secondary line of enquiry was to see whether one was superior to the other regarding pain, function, quality of life and survival.

methodsThis current report is a 6-10-year (median 7.9 years) follow-up study of the remaining 69 patients with a cemented three-component TKA for osteoarthritis in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial.

resultsIn the posterior stabilized group, five of the 40 knees (13%) versus five of the 29 posterior stabilized mobile group (17%) experienced anterior knee pain. No differences were observed with regard to ROM, VAS, Oxford 12-item knee questionnaire, SF-36, HSS patella, Kujala or the AKSS score. Patients with anterior knee pain reported more pain, lower levels of the AKSS, HSS patella and the Kujala scores than the patients without anterior knee pain.

conclusionIn the current clinical practice, the appearance of anterior knee pain persists as a problem; simply changing to a mobile bearing does not seem to be the solution. The posterior stabilized mobile total knee did not sustain the advantage of less anterior knee pain, compared with the posterior stabilized fixed total knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level II.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePain MeasurementPatellofemoral Pain SyndromePostoperative PainProspective StudiesProsthesis Design

Identifiers

PMID23124601

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.