Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27631647›Full record

ReviewKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2016

Navigated "small implants" in knee reconstruction.

Norberto Confalonieri, Alessio Biazzo, Pietro Cerveri, Chris Pullen, Alfonso Manzotti

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Current status of bicompartmental arthroplasty.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Norberto Confalonieri1st Orthopaedic and Trauma Department, CTO Hospital, ASST G. Pini-CTO, Milan, Italy. Norberto.confalonieri@gmail.com.
Alessio Biazzo1st Orthopaedic and Trauma Department, CTO Hospital, ASST G. Pini-CTO, Milan, Italy.
Pietro CerveriDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20100, Milan, Italy.
Chris PullenOrthopaedic Department, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Alfonso ManzottiOrthopaedic and Trauma Department, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, ASST FBF-Sacco, Milan, Italy.
CTO Hospital · ITIstituto Ortopedico Gaetano Pini · ITLuigi Sacco Hospital · ITPolitecnico di Milano · ITThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAt the beginning of this century, unprecedented interest in the concept of using less invasive approaches for the treatment of knee degenerative diseases was ignited. Initial interest in this approach was about navigated and non-navigated knee reconstruction using small implants and conventional total knee arthroplasty.

methodsTo this end, a review of the published literature relating to less invasive compartmental arthroplasty of the knee using computer-based alignment techniques and on soft tissue-dedicated small implants is presented. The authors present and compare their personal results using these techniques with those reported in the current literature. These involved the use of a shorter incision and an emphasis sparing. However, nowadays most surgeons look at compartmental knee resurfacing with the use of small implants as the new customized approach for younger and higher-demand patients. The aim of this paper is to stimulate further debate.

resultsSince the beginning of 2000, computer-assisted surgery has been applied to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and later to compartmental knee arthroplasty. Recent studies in the literature have reported better implant survivorship for younger patients using navigation in TKA at longer-term follow-up. Only one published report was identified showing superior clinical outcomes at short-term follow-up using computer-assisted technology compared with conventional alignment techniques in small implant surgery. No studies were found in the literature that demonstrated similar clinical advantages with navigated small implants at long-term follow-up. Two published meta-analyses were identified reporting better implant and limb alignment and no increase in complications using a navigated unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. However, neither meta-analysis showed superior clinical outcomes or survivorship with the navigated techniques.

conclusionIn conclusion, we can assert that replacing just the damaged compartment and preserving the normal biomechanics will require not only new implant designs but also new technologies allowing the surgeon to make extremely precise adjustments to implant alignment and providing continuous feedback during surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisProsthesis DesignArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeHumansKnee JointSurgery, Computer-AssistedTreatment OutcomeBi-unicompartmental knee arthroplastyComputer-assisted surgeryPatello-femoral arthroplastySmall implantsSoft-tissue-sparing surgeryTri-unicompartmental knee arthroplastyUnicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID27631647
OpenAlexW2519737219

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.