ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2015
Device-length changes and implant function following surgical implantation of the KineSpring in cadaver knees.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe KineSpring implant system has been shown to provide load reductions at the medial compartment of the knee, and has demonstrated clinical success in reducing pain and increasing function in patients with medial knee osteoarthritis. These results depend on the ability of the KineSpring to rotate, lengthen, and shorten to accommodate knee motions, and in response to knee position and loading. PURPOSE: The present study was undertaken to determine length changes of the implanted KineSpring in response to a range of knee positions, external knee loads, and placements by different orthopedic surgeons. MATERIALS AND
methodsKineSpring system components were implanted in ten cadaver leg specimens by ten orthopedic surgeons, and absorber-length changes were measured under combined loading and in different positions of the knee. RESULTS AND
conclusionSpring compression consistent with knee-load reduction, and device lengthening and shortening to accommodate knee loads and motions were seen. These confirm the functionality of the KineSpring when implanted medially to the knee.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.