Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31017513›Full record

Trial reportActa orthopaedica2019

Marker-based versus model-based radiostereometric analysis of total knee arthroplasty migration: a reanalysis with comparable mean outcomes despite distinct types of measurement error.

Koen T van Hamersveld, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, Lennard A Koster, Rob G H H Nelissen, Sören Toksvig-Larsen, Bart L Kaptein

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Acta orthopaedica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Inducible displacement of cementless total knee arthroplasty components with conventional and weight-bearing CT-based radiostereometric analysis.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  4. Accuracy and precision of Volumetric Matching Micromotion Analysis (V3MA) is similar to RSA for tibial component migration in TKA.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Koen T van Hamersvelda Department of Orthopaedics , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden , the Netherlands.
Perla J Marang-van de Mheenb Department of Biomedical Data Sciences , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden ; the Netherlands.
Lennard A Kostera Department of Orthopaedics , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden , the Netherlands.
Rob G H H Nelissena Department of Orthopaedics , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden , the Netherlands.
Sören Toksvig-Larsenc Department of Orthopaedics, Hässleholm Hospital, Hässleholm, Sweden and Department of Clinical Sciences , Lund University , Lund , Sweden.
Bart L Kapteina Department of Orthopaedics , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden , the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose - Pooling data of studies evaluating total knee arthroplasty migration using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) may be compromised when the RSA method used would influence estimated differences between groups. We therefore reanalyzed a marker-based RSA study with model-based RSA to assess possible limitations of each RSA method, including insert micromotions in modular TKA and their effect on estimated group differences. Patients and methods - All patients had received a cemented Triathlon implant (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ, USA) with either an all-polyethylene (n = 29) or a metal-backed (n = 28) tibial component. The latter group was reanalyzed with model-based RSA. Precision of each RSA method was calculated using double examinations. Bland-Altman plots were constructed to determine the limits of agreement between the 2 RSA methods. Polyethylene insert micromotion was quantified by measuring migration with respect to the metal tray. Finally, analyses of the original study were repeated with the model-based RSA results. Results - Systematic differences were found in translations between marker-based and model-based RSA as a result of different reference origins being used for migration calculations. Micromotions of the polyethylene insert within the metal tray were negligibly small. Mean migration results were comparable between marker-based and model-based RSA when using the same reference origin, even though conclusions on individual patients may differ between RSA methods due to various types of measurement error (e.g., marker occlusion and model-fit inaccuracies). Interpretation - At least for the studied TKA design, pooling mean migration data of different RSA methods appears justified. For translations, however, adjustments should be made to correct for differences in reference origin. Migration patterns of individual patients may differ as a result of distinct types of measurement error.

Indexed as

Prosthesis FailureArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBiomarkersHumansKnee ProsthesisRadiostereometric AnalysisTime FactorsBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID31017513
PMCPMC7025693

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.