ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2018
Second-generation bi-cruciate stabilized total knee system has a lower reoperation and revision rate than its predecessor.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes and patient-reported joint noise after total knee arthroplasty using saddle-shaped rotating-platform and bi-cruciate-stabilized implant-surgical systems: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- Association between femorotibial rotational mismatch and early clinical outcomes after bi-cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Comparison of short-term clinical results between modified kinematically-aligned and guided motion bicruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2024Article
- Comparison of accuracy and early outcomes in robotic total knee arthroplasty using NAVIO and ROSA.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- PCL preservation or sacrifice does not influence clinical outcomes and survivorship at mid-term follow-up of a J-curve CR total knee replacement with a medial congruent liner and a functional coronal alignment.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Comparison of traditional PS versus kinematically designs in primary total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Guided-Motion Bicruciate-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty Reproduces Native Medial Collateral Ligament Strain.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Femoral rollback at high-flexion during squatting is related to the improvement of sports activities after bicruciate-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: an observational study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Observational
- Influence of surgical factors on patient satisfaction after bi-cruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty: retrospective examination using multiple regression analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Do obese patients benefit from a kinematic, appropriately designed total knee prosthesis?Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) can provide pain relief and good long-term results. However, nearly 30% of post-surgical patients are unsatisfied due to persistent pain and functional deficits. A second-generation bi-cruciate stabilized TKA device has a post-cam mechanism with an asymmetric femoral component, a polyethylene insert, and a medially concave and laterally convex shape. The device is designed to provide guided motion, and thus improve knee kinematics by more closely approximating a normal knee. The aim of this study was to evaluate early complication and revision rates of the second-generation device and to compare its clinical performance to the first-generation device. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective, longitudinal, non-concurrent cohort study, 140 TKAs were performed using the second-generation device on 131 patients from 2012 to 2016, and 155 TKAs were performed using the first-generation device on 138 patients from 2009 to 2012. Primary outcomes were occurrence of revisions and reoperations.
resultsThere were 31 reoperations [3.21 per 100 observed component years (OCY)] in 22 (2.28 per 100 OCY) TKAs in the first-generation device cohort compared to five reoperations (1.92 per 100 OCY) in four TKAs (1.54 per 100 OCY) in the second-generation device cohort. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 3.50 (P = 0.0254). There were 21 revisions (2.17 per 100 OCY) in 16 (1.66 per 100 OCY) TKAs in the first-generation device cohort, compared to only three revisions (1.15 per 100 OCY) in two TKAs (0.77 per 100 OCY) in the second-generation device cohort. The adjusted HR was 4.16 (P = 0.0693).
conclusionThe improved design of the second-generation device appears to be associated with a lower risk of reoperation and revision compared to that of the first-generation device. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.