Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30809942›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic surgery2019

Bone Defects in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty and Management.

Peng-Fei Lei, Ru-Yin Hu, Yi-He Hu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopaedic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peng-Fei LeiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, China.
Ru-Yin HuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, China.
Yi-He HuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1024-6314
Central South University · CNGuizhou Provincial People's Hospital · CN

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China 2018JJ3844Postdoctoral Research Program of Xiangya Hospital Central South University 223551Scientific Research Project of Health and Family Planning Commission of Hunan Province, China B2019188Youth Science Foundation of Xiangya Hospital Central South University 2017Q07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reviews the recent updates in revision of total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). We reviewed the recent articles on RTKA in databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) involves the replacement of all three compartments of the knee in surgery of the knee joint to restore capacity and function. TKA is one of the most common and reliable surgical treatment options for the treatment of knee diseases. However, some patients require revision of TKA (RTKA) after primary TKA for various reasons, including mechanical wear, implant loosening or breakage, malalignment, infection, instability, periprosthetic fracture, and persistent stiffness. Unfortunately, the overall outcome of RTKA is not as satisfactory as for primary TKA due to the uncertainty regarding the actual success rate and the risk factors for failure. Cementation, modular metal augmentation, bone grafting, autologous bone grafting, allogenic bone grafting, impactation bone grafting, structural bone allografting, metaphyseal fixation, using porous titanium coated press fit metaphyseal sleeves and porous tantalum structural cones, and megaprostheses or customized prostheses are the currently available management options for RTKA. However, most of the management systems possess specific complications. Novel approaches should be developed to improve functional capacity, implant survival rates, and quality of life in a cost-efficient manner.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBone TransplantationCementationHumansKnee JointKnee ProsthesisOsteolysisProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureRadiographyReoperationBone defectsKnee joint painManagementRevision of total knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID30809942
PMCPMC6430493
OpenAlexW2917702087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.