Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24032097›Full record

ReviewKnee surgery & related research2013

High-flexion posterior-stabilized total knee prosthesis: is it worth the hype?

Sanjeev Jain, Aditya Chandrashekhar Pathak, Kalaivanan Kanniyan, Sourabh Kulkarni, Sandeep Tawar, Prashant Mane

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Knee surgery & related research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Posterior-stabilized versus cruciate-retained implants for total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical trials.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Patients achieved greater range of movement when using high-flexion implants.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2015
    Review
  9. 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

6 authors.

Sanjeev JainDepartment of Orthopaedics, Dr LH Hiranandani Hospital, Mumbai, India.
Aditya Chandrashekhar Pathak
Kalaivanan Kanniyan
Sourabh Kulkarni
Sandeep Tawar
Prashant Mane

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-flexion knee prosthesis was introduced with the aim of obtaining higher degree of flexion and good survivorship in patients with high functional demands or those requiring squatting, kneeling, etc., which is more common in Asians. Based on all the research and experience with this prosthesis, it was concluded that high flexion designs meet the need of deeper degrees of flexion in selected sets of patients only. Results were equal and comparable to the traditional standard posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty design and superior to it in terms of gaining more flexion and fulfilling activities, such as squatting, kneeling, and sitting cross-legged.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyHigh flexionKneePosterior stabilized

Identifiers

PMID24032097
PMCPMC3767894
OpenAlexW2070372712

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.