Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26585908›Full record

Trial reportKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2017

Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: simpler, faster and more accurate than standard instrumentation-a randomized controlled trial.

João Vide, Tânia Pinto Freitas, Acácio Ramos, Henrique Cruz, João Paulo Sousa

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report 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 19 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. [Research progress on comparison of the application effects between personal specific instrumentation and computer-assisted navigation surgery in total knee arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2021
    Article
  16. Knee Prosthesis in the Computer Era.Orthopaedic surgery · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

5 authors.

João VideHospital Particular do Algarve, Hospital de Faro, Rua Alfredo Guisado, No. 14, Bloco 2, 6º E, 1500-030, Lisbon, Portugal. joaovide@gmail.com.
Tânia Pinto FreitasHospital Particular do Algarve, Hospital de Faro, Urb. Casal de Gambelas, Lote 2, Gambelas, 8005-226, Faro, Portugal.
Acácio RamosHospital Particular do Algarve, Hospital de Faro, Urb. Casal de Gambelas, Lote 2, Gambelas, 8005-226, Faro, Portugal.
Henrique CruzHospital Particular do Algarve, Urb. Casal de Gambelas, Lote 2, Gambelas, 8005-226, Faro, Portugal.
João Paulo SousaHospital Particular do Algarve, Urb. Casal de Gambelas, Lote 2, Gambelas, 8005-226, Faro, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) to standard instrumentation regarding efficacy to achieve a good coronal alignment and differences in surgical time, blood loss and length of stay.

methodsNinety-five of 100 randomized patients eligible for total knee arthroplasty were analysed. PSI with magnetic resonance and long-leg radiograph was performed in 47 patients, while 48 patients received standard instrumentation. Primary outcome measure was coronal alignment, evaluated with long-leg radiograph. Deviation >3° varus/valgus was considered an outlier. Surgical time was compared from skin to skin. Length of stay was a post hoc analysis. Blood loss was evaluated comparing the number of blood units spent, fall in haemoglobin and haematocrit levels.

resultsStandard instrumentation had a higher number of outliers in the coronal alignment with a relative risk of 3.015, compared to PSI. Surgical time was reduced by 18 min (24.8 %) with the PSI, as well as length of stay, with a half-day reduction. Number of blood units spent was significantly less in the PSI group. Relative risk of transfusion was 7.09 for patients in the standard instrumentation group. Difference in Hg and Htc levels were not significant. No patient had to abandon PSI. Minor changes to preoperative plan occurred in 14.9 % of the patient: cut review in 4.3 % and insert change in 10.6 %.

conclusionsPatient-specific instrumentation (PSI) is able to provide important advantages over standard instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: it lowers the risk of outliers and transfusion, is a faster procedure and enables a shorter length of stay with a low rate of intraoperative adjustments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisProsthesis DesignAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBlood Loss, SurgicalFemaleHematocritHemoglobinsHumansLength of StayMaleOperative TimeOsteoarthritis, KneeRadiographyTreatment OutcomeHemoglobinsArthroplastyInstrumentationKneePatient-specific

Identifiers

PMID26585908

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.