Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23318618›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume2012

Patellar resurfacing in primary total knee replacement: a meta-analysis.

R W D Pilling, E Moulder, V Allgar, J Messner, Z Sun, A Mohsen

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

R W D PillingDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Hospital of North Staffordshire, Newcastle Road, Stoke on Trent ST4 6QG, United Kingdom. rich_pilling@yahoo.co.uk
E Moulder
V Allgar
J Messner
Z Sun
A Mohsen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment of the patella during total knee replacement is an area of continuing debate. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to address the hypothesis that patellar resurfacing in primary total knee replacement improved patient outcome.

methodsRandomized controlled trials comparing patellar resurfacing with nonresurfacing in primary total knee replacement were included. The primary outcomes analyzed were knee scores, anterior knee pain, and patient satisfaction. We also investigated the prevalence of complications, revision surgery related specifically to the patellofemoral joint, the infection rate, operative time, and radiographic appearance.

resultsSixteen randomized controlled trials assessing 3465 knee replacements were eligible; 1710 procedures included patellar resurfacing and 1755 did not. The knee component of the Knee Society Score was significantly higher in the resurfacing group (p = 0.005); however, no significant difference was observed for the function component of the Knee Society Score or for any other reported knee score. Anterior knee pain was reported in 13% of resurfaced knees and in 24% of nonresurfaced knees; this difference was not significant (p = 0.1). Patients were satisfied with the outcome after 485 (90%) of 539 procedures that included patellar resurfacing compared with 488 (89%) of 548 that did not; this difference was not significant. There were ninety-three reported patellofemoral complications in the resurfacing group and 205 in the nonresurfacing group; this difference was significant (p = 0.02) in a random-effect model. The rate of reoperation because of anterior knee pain (p < 0.00001) and the rate of reoperation because of any patellofemoral complication (p = 0.002) were significantly higher in the nonresurfaced group. No differences were found in the analyses of infection rate, operative time, or radiographic appearance.

conclusionsPatients who underwent patellar resurfacing experienced anterior knee pain and satisfaction with the arthroplasty procedure that were equivalent to those experienced by patients whose patella was not resurfaced; however, these patients underwent significantly fewer additional surgical procedures. Further long-term follow-up of modern prostheses in randomized studies measuring outcome with a patella-specific score is needed.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeHumansOperative TimeOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePain MeasurementPatellaPatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsProsthesis-Related InfectionsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReoperation

Identifiers

PMID23318618

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.