Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27307362›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume2016

Comparison of Mini-Midvastus and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty with Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with 5-Year Follow-up.

Hennie Verburg, Nina M C Mathijssen, Dieu-Donné Niesten, Jan A N Verhaar, Peter Pilot

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. [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 · 2018
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hennie VerburgDepartments of Orthopaedic Surgery (H.V. and D.-D.N.) and Orthopaedic Research (N.M.C.M. and P.P.), Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands hverburg@rdgg.nl.
Nina M C MathijssenDepartments of Orthopaedic Surgery (H.V. and D.-D.N.) and Orthopaedic Research (N.M.C.M. and P.P.), Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands.
Dieu-Donné NiestenDepartments of Orthopaedic Surgery (H.V. and D.-D.N.) and Orthopaedic Research (N.M.C.M. and P.P.), Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands.
Jan A N VerhaarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Peter PilotDepartments of Orthopaedic Surgery (H.V. and D.-D.N.) and Orthopaedic Research (N.M.C.M. and P.P.), Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands.
Reinier de Graaf Hospital · NLErasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe main objective of this prospective randomized study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the mini-midvastus (MMV) approach with the conventional approach for total knee arthroplasty at the 5-year follow-up.

methodsNinety-seven patients (100 knees) with osteoarthritis were assigned to the MMV group or to a group receiving conventional total knee arthroplasty. Intraoperative and postoperative clinical data were collected. At 6 weeks and at 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Knee Society Score (KSS), and the Short Form (SF)-12 were completed. Radiographs of the knee were made preoperatively and at 1 day and 1 and 5 years postoperatively. Computed tomography (CT) scans were performed 2 years postoperatively.

resultsIn the MMV group, the mean skin incision was 2.5 cm shorter (p < 0.001) and the mean duration of the operation was 6 minutes longer than in the conventional total knee arthroplasty group (p < 0.05). Eight patients in the conventional group had a lateral parapatellar retinacular release compared with 1 in the MMV group; the difference was significant (p = 0.01). Three intraoperative complications, including 2 small lateral femoral condylar fractures and 1 partial patellar tendon laceration, occurred in the MMV group. Seven patients in the MMV group had postoperative blisters; all of them had a relatively large femoral component and 4 of them were large men. The radiographs and CT scans of the prostheses showed no significant differences between the MMV and conventional groups except for the posterior slope of the tibial component. In addition, no significance differences were detected between the groups with respect to the KOOS, OKS, KSS, and SF-12 scores determined at the 6-week and the 1, 2, and 5-year follow-up evaluations.

conclusionsIn the rehabilitation period and at the short and mid-term follow-up, no relevant clinical and radiographic differences were found between the MMV and the conventional approach for total knee arthroplasty, making the advantage of MMV total knee arthroplasty cosmetic. We discourage the use of the MMV approach in large male patients because of the increased number of intraoperative complications and skin blisters postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee JointLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePatellaProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularTibiaTomography, X-Ray ComputedTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID27307362
OpenAlexW2420387320

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.