ArticleDer Orthopade2018
[5-year follow-up of 210 Columbus knee prostheses : A prospective multicentre study].
Article in Der Orthopade, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implant design affects walking and stair navigation after total knee arthroplasty: a double-blinded randomised controlled trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Trial
- Article
- 10-year follow-up of the Columbus knee prostheses system in a prospective multicenter study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
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 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs part of 10-year documentation using the Columbus system, the interim evaluation was carried out 5 years after implantation with a collection of clinical scores, evaluation of radiological imaging and collection of statistics concerning complications.
methodsThere was a multicentre prospective recruitment of consecutive patients with the indication of implantation of a surface replacement prosthesis (Columbus CR, Deep Dish fixed inlay). Preoperatively, clinical scores were recorded (KSS and Oxford score). Five years postoperatively a new evaluation of clinical scores, the range of motion (ROM) and a radiological check-up including full leg imaging under load was performed. During this period, detailed complication documentation was made.
resultsA total of 210 patients were recruited in five centres. 187 patients were available for examination 5 years after surgery. Cumulative KSS increased from 87.5 (±26.6) preoperatively to 170 (±29.1) 5 years postoperatively. The cumulative KSS improvement was 81.5 (±35.2) points and was highly significant (p < 0.0001; t‑test). The average functional improvement in the Oxford score between the preoperative and 5‑year follow-up was 21.7 (±8.8) points and was also highly significant (p < 0.0001). The ROM improved from 106.3° (±20.2) preoperatively to 114.0° (±12.1) 5 years postoperatively (p < 0.0001; t test). Five years after implantation, the average mechanical leg axis was 178.0° (±2.1). There was no clinically apparent or native radiologic visible aseptic loosening of the femoral or tibial joint component. There were 33 complications, but no implant-related complications such as inlay dislocation, material fracture or aseptic loosening. In total, 6 revision surgeries were performed during the follow-up period, which corresponds to a survival rate of 97.1% (CI 95%) for the implanted Columbus knee in the present patient collective for 5 years.
conclusionThe interim analysis at 5 years of long-term observation of the Columbus system provided good clinical and radiographic results.
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.