Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24687433›Full record

Trial reportClinical orthopaedics and related research2015

The Mark Coventry Award: Trabecular metal tibial components were durable and reliable in primary total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial.

Luis Pulido, Matthew P Abdel, David G Lewallen, Michael J Stuart, Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo, Arlen D Hanssen, Mark W Pagnano

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Tantalum Cementless Versus Cemented Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-analysis of Level 1 Studies.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Uncemented or cemented femoral components work equally well in total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. [Effectiveness of cementless total knee arthroplasty with three-dimensional-printed trabecular metal interface].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Fixation in total knee arthroplasty: are cemented implants still mandatory in younger and obese patients?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. New Horizons of Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luis PulidoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA, pulidosierra.luis@mayo.edu.
Matthew P Abdel
David G Lewallen
Michael J Stuart
Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo
Arlen D Hanssen
Mark W Pagnano
Mayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough highly porous metals have demonstrated excellent bone ingrowth properties and so are an intriguing option for fixation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), some surgeons are skeptical about the durability of uncemented tibial fixation and the potential for soft tissues to adhere to these porous metals and perhaps cause knee stiffness or pain. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to compare, in the context of a randomized clinical trial, a highly porous metal tibia compared with a traditional modular cemented tibia in terms of survivorship, Knee Society scores, range of motion (ROM), and complications.

methodsFrom 2003 to 2006, 397 patients (age 67.8 ± 8.7 years; 54% female) were randomized to three groups: (1) traditional modular cemented tibia; (2) cemented highly porous metal tibia; and (3) uncemented highly porous metal tibia. The same posterior-stabilized femoral component and patella component were cemented in every case. Stratified randomization was done for surgeon, patient's age, sex, and body mass index. Survivorship at 5 years was compared between the groups, as were Knee Society scores, ROM, and complications. Radiographic assessment included alignment, radiolucency, and implant migration/loosening. Patients were followed until death, revision, or for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 5 years; range, 2-9 years). Four patients were lost to followup before 2 years.

resultsHighly porous metal tibias (both uncemented and cemented) were no different from traditional cemented modular tibial modular components in terms of survivorship at 5 years using a intention-to-treat analysis (96.8% [1]; 97.6% [2]; 96.7% [3]; p = 0.59). A per-protocol analysis revealed that no highly porous metal tibia was revised for aseptic loosening. Highly porous metal tibias performed comparably to traditional cemented modular tibias in terms of Knee Society scores, ROM, and the frequency of complications.

conclusionsAt 5 years this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that highly porous metal tibias provided comparably durable fixation and reliable pain relief and restoration of function when compared with a traditional cemented modular tibia in TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

Awards and PrizesKnee ProsthesisMetalsAdultAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBiomechanical PhenomenaBone CementsFemaleHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedMinnesotaPorosityBone CementsMetals

Identifiers

PMID24687433
PMCPMC4390908
OpenAlexW2333901252

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.