ArticleActa ortopedica brasileira
REVISION TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY USING THE MODERN CONSTRAINED CONDYLAR KNEE PROSTHESIS.
Article in Acta ortopedica brasileira. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rotating hinge knee versus constrained condylar knee in revision total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Clinical outcome and survival rate of condylar constrained knee prosthesis in revision total knee arthroplasty: an average nine point six year follow-up.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Hybrid Cementation Technique Using the New Modular System for Aseptic Knee Arthroplasty Revision Surgery.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2022Article
- Revision knee surgery: the practical approach.EFORT open reviews · 2021Review
- Knee joint instability after total knee replacement in a patient with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: the role of insert changes as practical solution.BMJ case reports · 2018Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether the second-generation constrained condylar prosthesis provided satisfactory results in revision total knee arthroplasty.
methodsA series of 41 cases of revision total knee arthroplasty using the second-generation constrained condylar knee prosthesis was reviewed. The series comprised 7 men and 34 women with a mean age of 73.2 years. The original diagnosis was predominantly osteoarthritis. The most common reason for revision surgery was aseptic loosening. The mean interval between the primary and revision surgeries was 66.4 months. The mean follow-up period was 49.4 months.
resultsThe mean Knee Society knee score improved from 43.8 to 82.9 after revision surgery, the mean Knee Society function score improved from 37.1 to 79.2; the range of motion improved from 95.6° to 105.6° and the radiological femorotibial alignment improved from 181.4° (varus 6.4°) to 174.9° (valgus 0.1°), on average (
conclusionRevision total knee arthroplasty with the use of the second-generation constrained condylar knee prosthesis yielded reproducible clinical success. Level of Evidence IV, Case series.
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.