Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30908538›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Rotating hinge knee versus constrained condylar knee in revision total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

Jung-Ro Yoon, Ji-Young Cheong, Jung-Taek Im, Phil-Sun Park, Jae-Ok Park, Young-Soo Shin

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Effects of elastic modulus of the metal block on the condylar-constrained knee prosthesis tibial fixation stability].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Mid-term clinical radiological results of the constrained condylar knee prosthesis in total knee revision.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jung-Ro YoonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Ji-Young CheongDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Jung-Taek ImDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Phil-Sun ParkDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Jae-Ok ParkMedical Library, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Young-Soo ShinDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University School of Medicine, Chuncheon, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1030-9979
Veterans Health Service Medical Center · KRHallym University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is debate in the literature whether rotating hinge knee (RHK) or constrained condylar knee (CCK) prostheses lead to better clinical outcomes and survival rates in patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the survivorship and clinical outcomes of RHK and CCK prostheses. In this meta-analysis, we reviewed studies that evaluated pain and function scores, range of motion (ROM), complications, and survival rates in patients treated with RHK or CCK with short-term (<5 years) or midterm (5-10 years) follow-up. The survivorship was considered as the time to additional surgical intervention such as removal or revision of the components. A total of 12 studies (one randomized study and 11 non-randomized studies) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed in detail. The proportion of the knees in which short-term (<5 years) survival rates (RHK, 83/95; CCK, 111/148; odds ratio [OR] 0.52; 95% CI, 0.24-1.11; P = 0.09) and midterm (5-10 years) survival rates (RHK, 104/128; CCK, 196/234; OR 1.05; 95% CI, 0.56-1.97; P = 0.88) were evaluated did not differ significantly between RHK and CCK prostheses. In addition, there were no significant differences in ROM (95% CI: -0.40 to 9.93; P = 0.07) and complication rates (95% CI: 0.66 to 2.49; P = 0.46). In contrast, CCK groups reported significantly better pain score (95% CI: 0.50 to 2.73; P = 0.005) and function score (95% CI: 0.01 to 2.00; P = 0.05) than RHK groups. This meta-analysis revealed that 87.4% of RHK and 75.0% of CCK prostheses survive at short-term (<5 years), while 81.3% of RHK and 83.8% of CCK prostheses survive at midterm (5-10 years). The differences in standardized mean pain and function scores we detected were likely to be imperceptible to patients and almost certainly below the minimum clinically important level, despite a significant difference in both groups. Based on the findings of the current meta-analysis, RHK prostheses continue to be an option in complex RTKA with reasonable midterm survivorship.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisProsthesis FailureArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansKnee JointMalePain MeasurementProsthesis DesignRange of Motion, ArticularReoperationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID30908538
PMCPMC6433230
OpenAlexW2924313399

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.