Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23535285›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of arthroplasty2013

Functional and radiographic short-term outcome evaluation of the Visionaire system, a patient-matched instrumentation system for total knee arthroplasty.

Bart J Vundelinckx, Liesbeth Bruckers, Kris De Mulder, Jo De Schepper, Gert Van Esbroeck

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of arthroplasty, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 7 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. Trial
  9. Rotational component alignment in patient-specific total knee arthroplasty compared with conventional cutting instrument.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Outcomes following total knee arthroplasty with CT-based patient-specific instrumentation.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2017
    Article
  18. Custom cutting guides in total knee arthroplasty.Annals of translational medicine · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Bart J VundelinckxCatholic University Leuven, Belgium.
Liesbeth Bruckers
Kris De Mulder
Jo De Schepper
Gert Van Esbroeck

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient matched instrumentation is a new operative tool in the field of total knee arthroplasty. Custom made cutting blocks are designed to perform distal femoral and tibial bone cuts according to a pre-operative planning. This study evaluates the Visionaire system of Smith & Nephew. Thirty-one patients, operated with the Visionaire technique, were compared to an equal control group for different clinical and radiographic outcome parameters. Between both groups, no statistical significant difference could be found in post-operative pain, satisfaction, functional outcome, hospital stay, blood loss, radiographic alignment and precision of bone cuts. Only tibial plateau backslope can be created with more precision in the Visionaire group. But there was a statistical significant difference for residual flexion deformity after a mean follow-up time of 200 days.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisSoftwareAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleHumansKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedProsthesis DesignProsthesis FittingRadiographyRecovery of FunctionTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID23535285

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.