Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25416675›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2016

High rate of implant loosening for uncemented resurfacing-type medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Danilo Bruni, Stefano Zaffagnini, Francesco Iacono, Laura Bragonzoni, Mirco Lo Presti, Maria Pia Neri, Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli, Marco Nitri, Giovanni Raspugli, Maurilio Marcacci

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Danilo Bruni2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy. d.bruni@biomec.ior.it.
Stefano Zaffagnini2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Francesco Iacono2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Laura BragonzoniBiomechanics and Technologic Innovation Laboratory, Codivilla-Putti Research Center, Via di Barbiano 1/10, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Mirco Lo Presti2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Maria Pia Neri2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Marco Nitri2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Giovanni Raspugli2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Maurilio Marcacci2nd Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Clinic, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITOrthopedic Institute · USUniversity of Bologna · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine the medium-term implant survivorship, the clinical results and the failure mechanisms of a novel unicompartmental arthroplasty for uncemented resurfacing of the medial tibio-femoral compartment.

methodsSeventy-six consecutive patients were prospectively evaluated with a mean final follow-up of 6 years (SD 5.3 months). In 44 patients, the diagnosis was osteoarthritis, and in 32 patients, it was avascular necrosis of the medial femoral condyle. The Hospital for Special Surgery Score was used for objective clinical evaluation, and a self-administered visual analogue scale was used to quantify residual pain at each observation point. Implant survivorship was determined assuming revision for any reason as endpoint.

resultsNineteen patients were revised (6 with osteoarthritis and 13 with avascular necrosis of the medial femoral condyle). The mean interval time from index surgery to revision was 11.2 months (SD 4.66 months). Implant survivorship was higher in patients with osteoarthritis with respect to those with avascular necrosis of the medial femoral condyle (p = 0.018). Aseptic loosening was the most frequent failure mechanism. Femoral component loosening was reported in five patients and tibial component loosening was reported in other six patients. Assuming revision for any reason as endpoint, an implant survivorship of 74.3 % at 6-year follow-up was determined. In the remaining 57 patients, satisfactory clinical results were obtained. Hospital for Special Surgery Score and visual analogue scale for residual pain showed significant improvements (p < 0.03 and p < 0.045, respectively).

conclusionsAt the present time, the standard cemented implants and the conventional designs for unicompartmental knee replacement still represent the optimal solution. The authors do not recommend the widespread use of this technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

Prosthesis FailureAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleFemur Head NecrosisFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee JointKnee ProsthesisMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneeProspective StudiesReoperationVisual Analog ScaleAseptic looseningCementless fixationFocal resurfacingMinimal bone resectionMinimally invasive surgeryUnicompartmental knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID25416675
OpenAlexW2060372989

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.