Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26006786›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2015

All-polyethylene tibial components are not inferior to metal-backed tibial components in long-term follow-up of knee arthroplasties.

Mustafa Yassin, Avraham Garti, Moshe Weissbrot, Uzi Ashkenazi, Muhammed Khatib, Dror Robinson

Registry-linked trialAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03569670 (All-Polyethylene Tibial Components in Total Knee Arthroplasty), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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.

NCT03569670 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

All-Polyethylene Tibial Components in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Radiostereometric Analysis Comparing Posterior Stabilizing and Condylar Stabilizing Implants

TypeinterventionalSponsorLondon Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sRan2020 to 2022Enrolled0ConditionsOsteoarthritis, KneeArmsPosterior stabilized all-polyethylene tibial component, Cruciate retaining all-polyethylene tibial component
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. All-polyethylene versus metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. All-polyethylene versus metal-backed tibial component in total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mustafa YassinRabin Medical Center, Hasharon Hospital, Affiliated with Tel Aviv University School of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Avraham Garti
Moshe Weissbrot
Uzi Ashkenazi
Muhammed Khatib
Dror Robinson
Rabin Medical Center · ILLev Hasharon Hospital · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAll-polyethylene tibias (APT) are under-utilized in most of the Western countries, due to a shift from the original all-polyethylene design to metal-backed tibia (MBT) components. Only few total knee prostheses allow direct comparison between APT and MBT components, due to different geometric designs in many systems. The Depuy PFC Sigma prostheses have a similar geometric design in both the MBT and the APT, and with the same corresponding femoral component, thus allowing an assessment and comparison between APT and MBT components.

methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of osteoarthritic patients who underwent total knee arthroplasties with at least 10-year follow-up comparing a modern congruent APT component to a modular MBT component of the same design.

resultsSeventy-three patients (81 knees, mean age 73 years) were available for assessment. Among the cohort, three patients had revision surgery (one from the APT group). In total, 73 patients were available for follow-up (59 MBT prostheses and 22 APT prostheses). There were no differences in knee function (Knee Society score, range of motion, stability) or radiographic parameters between the groups. Of the three revisions due to tibial tray loosening, only one was performed in the APT group and two were performed in the MBT group; another revision in the MBT group was due to loosening of both components; none of the revisions were due to septic complications. Ten-year survivorship of both designs was 92 %.

conclusionsWhile function of both designs appears similar, the APT design shows a trend toward requiring fewer revisions and is more cost-effective.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBone CementsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee ProsthesisMaleMetal-on-Metal Joint ProsthesesOsteoarthritis, KneePolyethyleneProsthesis DesignRange of Motion, ArticularRetrospective StudiesTibiaBone CementsPolyethylene

Identifiers

PMID26006786
OpenAlexW381554946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.