ArticleChinese medical journal2015
Are There Any Clinical and Radiographic Differences Between Quadriceps-sparing and Mini-medial Parapatellar Approaches in Total Knee Arthroplasty After a Minimum 5 Years of Follow-up?
Article in Chinese medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of conventional and minimally invasive approaches of primary total knee arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Comparisons of the Efficacy and Safety of Total Knee Arthroplasty by Different Surgical Approaches: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- [A prospective randomized controlled study of total knee arthroplasty via mini-subvastus and conventional approach].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2018Trial
- Better outcomes after mini-subvastus approach for primary total knee arthroplasty: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020Review
- Minimally invasive versus conventional approaches in total knee replacement/arthroplasty: A review of the literature.Journal of orthopaedics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the early clinical outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using minimally invasive surgery techniques have been widely described, data on the mid- to long-term outcomes are limited. We designed a retrospective study to compare the two most common TKA techniques - The modified quadriceps-sparing (m-QS) approach and the mini-medial parapatellar (MMP) approach - In terms of the clinical and radiographic parameters, over a minimum follow-up period of 5 years.
methodsThe m-QS approach was used in 31 knees and the MMP approach, in 36 knees. Knees in both groups were compared for component position and alignment, knee alignment, length of the skin incision, range of motion, Visual Analog Scale score, muscle torques, Knee Society Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and number of complications.
resultsThere were no major intergroup differences in any of the clinical and radiographic outcomes assessed at the final follow-up examination.
conclusionsOn the basis of numbers studied, the m-QS group, which requires more technique, showed equivalent results with the MMP group in the postoperative 5 years. Preservation of the extensor mechanism in the m-QS approach could not ensure any improvement in the clinical outcomes during the mid-term follow-up duration.
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.