ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2017
Outcomes of a newer-generation cementless total knee arthroplasty design in patients less than 50 years of age.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Using a Cementless Highly Porous Titanium Tibial Baseplate in Patients Under the Age of 50: An Average 7.6-year Follow-up.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Patient selection and management for successful cementless total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery & related research · 2026Review
- Cementless total knee arthroplasty in post-traumatic or Post-ACL knees: A case series.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- Fixation in total knee arthroplasty: are cemented implants still mandatory in younger and obese patients?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Review
- Enhanced improvement and comparable survivorship in cementless versus cemented total knee arthroplasty: a 2-year analysis of patient reported outcomes and 5-year analysis of implant survivorship.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is safe and effective at a minimum follow-up of 4.2 years: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Trend of using cementless total knee arthroplasty: a nationwide analysis from 2015 to 2021.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2024Article
- The Evolution, Current Indications and Outcomes of Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Multiacquisition Variable-Resonance Image Combination Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Study Detailed Bone Apposition and Fixation of Cementless Knee System Compared to Cemented Total Knee Replacements.Arthroplasty today · 2022Article
- Clinical outcomes and survivorship of cementless triathlon total knee arthroplasties: a systematic review.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2022Article
- A Short-Term Multicenter Analysis of Radiolucent Lines in a Single Uncemented Rotating Platform Implant for Total Knee Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2022Article
- Restricted kinematic alignment leads to uncompromised osseointegration of cementless total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Article
- Patellar management during total knee arthroplasty: a review.EFORT open reviews · 2021Review
- Cementless knee arthroplasty: a review of recent performance.Bone & joint open · 2021Article
- CHANGES IN BONE MINERAL DENSITY AFTER TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY.Acta ortopedica brasileiraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundYounger patients undergoing cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may be at risk for lower implant survivorship and higher revision rates due to the historical increased prevalence of aseptic loosening and instability in this cohort. The recent advances of cementless TKAs may mitigate some of these complications. However, there is a paucity of studies reporting on patients who are under 50 years who have undergone a cementless TKA. Therefore, this study evaluated: (I) implant survivorship; (II) functional outcomes and complications; and (III) radiographic outcomes in patients who were less than 50 years of age and underwent cementless TKA.
methodsA total of 29 patients (31 knees) younger than 50 years who underwent primary TKA at a single institution (Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, New York, USA) from June 2008 to May 2014 were included. Their mean follow-up was 4 years (range, 2 to 6 years). The cohort included 20 women and 9 men who had a mean age of 45 years (range, 34 to 49 years), and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 33 kg/m
resultsThe overall implant survivorship was 100%; there were no failures or revision surgeries performed as of the latest follow-up visit. At the latest follow-up, the mean Knee Society pain score was 92 points (range, 80 to 95 points) and the mean Knee Society function score was 84 points (range, 70 to 90 points). Additionally, the mean knee extension was 1 degree (range, 0 to 5 degrees) and the mean knee flexion was 125 degrees (range, 95 to 140 degrees). Furthermore, at the latest follow-up, on radiographic evaluation, there was no evidence of component loosening, subsidence, radiolucency, gap formation, or reactive changes, and there were no postoperative complications.
conclusionsCementless fixation of TKAs had excellent survivorship and functional and radiographic outcomes at midterm follow-up in patients younger than 50 years. Although longer follow-up is needed, these cementless TKA implants appear to provide promising results in younger patient populations.
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.