ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2017
Total and intercondylar notch bone resection in posterior stabilized knee arthroplasty: analysis of five manufacturer designs.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intra-operative fractures in primary total knee arthroplasty - a systematic review.Knee surgery & related research · 2020Review
- Increased Intercondylar Femoral Box Cut-to-Femur Size Ratio During Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty Increases Risk for Intraoperative Fracture.Arthroplasty today · 2020Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe study aimed to volumetrically measure and compare the bone amount removed through the intercondylar femoral notch and the total bone amount removed through five different brands of implant design in order to provide orthopaedic surgeons with opinions in respect of implant selection.
methodsTen implants from five different total knee arthroplasty implant manufacturers, namely Nex-Gen Legacy, Genesis 2 PS, Vanguard, Sigma PS and Scorpio NRG PS, were applied to a total of 50 sawbone models. Equal or the closest sizes of each brand on the anteroposterior plane were selected, and cuts were made following the standard technique. The removed bone pieces were measured in terms of volume and length in three planes, and were statistically analysed.
resultsThe comparison made by excluding femoral notch cuts did not produce any statistically significant difference between the amounts of bone removed. The following data were volumetrically obtained from the intercondylar femoral notch cut: Vanguard (3.6 ± 0.4 cm
conclusionThere are significant differences between implant designs in terms of preserving bone stock, and a large proportion of the difference arises from the intercondylar femoral notch cut.
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.