Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25448325›Full record

ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2015

No sex differences exist in posterior condylar offsets of the knee.

Pramod B Voleti, Jason W Stephenson, Paul A Lotke, Gwo-Chin Lee

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Gender differences in morphology exist in posterior condylar offsets of the knee in Korean population.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019
    Article
  8. Radiographic measurement of the posterior femoral offset is not precise.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Pramod B VoletiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, 1 Cupp Pavilion, 39th and Market Streets, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Jason W Stephenson
Paul A Lotke
Gwo-Chin Lee
University of Pennsylvania · USS.P.E.C.I.E.S. · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRestoration of posterior condylar offset during TKA is believed to be important to improving knee kinematics, maximizing ROM, and minimizing flexion instability. However, controversy exists regarding whether there are important anatomic differences between sexes and whether a unisex knee prosthesis can restore the anatomy of knees in males and females. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of our study were to determine if sex differences exist in (1) absolute posterior condylar offset size, (2) relative posterior condylar offset size in relation to total condylar height, and (3) posterior condylar articular cartilage thickness.

methodsWe identified 100 patients (50 men and 50 women) without a history of arthritis, deformity, dysplasia, osteochondral defect, fracture, or surgery about the knee who had MRI of the knee performed. All MR images were ordered by primary care medical physicians for evaluation of nonspecific knee pain. Using a previously described three-dimensional MRI protocol, we measured posterior condylar offset, total condylar height, and articular cartilage thickness at the medial and lateral femoral condyles and compared values to evaluate for potential sex differences. We performed an a priori power calculation using a 2-mm posterior condylar offset difference as the minimum clinically important difference; with 2n = 100, our power to detect such a difference was 99.8%.

resultsCompared with females, males had greater medial posterior condylar offset (30 mm [95% CI, 29.3-30.7 mm; SD, 2.5 mm] vs 28 mm [95% CI, 27.0-28.5 mm; SD, 2.7 mm]), lateral posterior condylar offset (27 mm [95% CI, 26.2-27.3 mm; SD, 2.0 mm] vs 25 mm [95% CI, 24.2-25.4 mm; SD, 2.0 mm]), medial condylar height (63 mm [SD, 3.2 mm] vs 57 mm [SD, 4.4 mm]), and lateral condylar height (71 mm [SD, 5.2 mm] vs 65 mm [SD: 4.0 mm]) (all p values < 0.001). However, the mean ratio of medial posterior condylar offset to medial condylar height (0.48 [SD, 0.04] vs 0.49 [SD, 0.05]) and the mean ratio of lateral posterior condylar offset to lateral condylar height (0.38 [SD, 0.05] vs 0.38 [SD, 0.03]) were not different between sexes (p = 0.08 and p = 0.8, respectively). There also was no sex difference in mean articular cartilage thickness at either condyle (medial condyle: 2.7 mm [SD, 0.5 mm] vs 2.5 mm [SD, 0.7 mm]; lateral condyle: 2.6 mm [SD, 0.6 mm] vs 2.5 mm [SD, 0.8 mm]) (both p values ≥ 0.1).

conclusionsResults of our study showed that knees in males exhibited greater posterior condylar offset and greater total condylar height at the medial and lateral femoral condyles, however, there were no sex differences in the ratio of posterior condylar offset to condylar height at either condyle. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that a unisex knee prosthesis design is adequate to recreate the normal posterior condylar offsets for men and women.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisProsthesis DesignAdultArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleFemurHumansKnee JointMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleRange of Motion, ArticularYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25448325
PMCPMC4353521
OpenAlexW2000685929

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.