Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30361753›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2019

Promising early outcomes of a novel anatomic knee system.

Vincent P Galea, Mina A Botros, Rami Madanat, Christian S Nielsen, Charles Bragdon

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Vincent P GaleaHarris Orthopaedic Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St. GRJ 1231, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. vgalea@mgh.harvard.edu.
Mina A BotrosHarris Orthopaedic Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St. GRJ 1231, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Rami MadanatHarris Orthopaedic Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St. GRJ 1231, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Christian S NielsenHarris Orthopaedic Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St. GRJ 1231, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Charles BragdonHarris Orthopaedic Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St. GRJ 1231, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe primary aim of this study was to report the early clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients who have been treated with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using the Persona knee system. The secondary aim was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of the Persona knee system to those of the NexGen implant.

methodsA registry-based study of a consecutive series of 112 patients (129 knees) treated with the Persona knee system from a single center was conducted. Preoperative, 1-year, and 2-year radiographs and PROs were analyzed. Postoperative radiographs were assessed for radiolucency and component positioning. Patients were monitored for postoperative complications and revision. Two-year PROs were compared to a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort of patients treated with the NexGen knee system.

resultsNinety-five percent of knees were within literature-defined safe ranges of the anatomical tibiofemoral axis, tibial varus/valgus angle, femoral flexion/extension angle, and tibial slope. Radiolucency was observed in 0.9% and 1.3% of knees at one and 2 years, respectively. Two-year PRO values demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements from the preoperative values. The cumulative 2-year percent revision was 3.0% (95% confidence interval 1.9-3.8%); there were no revisions due to implant mechanical failure. Patients treated with the Persona knee system had higher KOOS symptom (p = 0.037) and KOOS QOL (p < 0.001) scores compared to patients with the NexGen knee system.

conclusionsThis knee design demonstrates excellent clinical outcomes, similar or better than the NexGen knee system, at early follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPropensity ScoreAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleFemurFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePostoperative PeriodPatient-reported outcomesPersonaRadiolucencyTKATKRTotal knee arthroplastyTotal knee replacement

Identifiers

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.