ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020
Low femoral component prominence negatively influences early revision rate in robotic unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current role of intraoperative sensing technology in total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty: an evolution in progress. A concise review of the available systems and the data supporting them.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Unworn cartilage in total knee arthroplasty strongly deviates from 2 mm: MRI, robotic-assisted and ruler assessment.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- Image-Based Robotic Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Results in Fewer Radiologic Outliers with No Impact on Revision Rates Compared to Imageless Systems: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The unintentional effect of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty on extraarticular deformity and of high tibial osteotomy on intraarticular deformity for the treatment of anteromedial osteoarthritis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Robotics improves alignment accuracy and reduces early revision rates for UKA in the hands of low-volume UKA surgeons.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is higher than in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and implant positioning may play a role. In combination with a pre-operative CT, robotic UKA may provide the ability to position the implants more precisely. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of component prominence relative to the native joint surface on early outcomes and revisions. The hypothesis was that aiming for restoration of joint space to 0.5-1.5 mm will improve outcomes.
methodsRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 94 patients undergoing robotic-assisted UKA (Mako, Stryker) was performed. The 'prominence' of the implant surface relative to the native bony surface in sagittal plane, hip-knee-ankle (HKA) correction in coronal plane was documented intraoperatively. The mean achieved gap between two components under valgus stress captured in at least 5 different flexion angles was calculated. These were then analysed for impact on early revision rate and outcomes, stratified by gender.
resultsMedian HKA correction was 3.5° (range 0°-9.5°). Median femoral prominence was 1.5 mm (range - 0.6 to 4 mm) and median tibial prominence was 4.3 mm (2-7 mm). The median achieved gap was 1.0 mm (- 1.2 to 2.8 mm). There was no difference in achieved correction between men and women (p = n.s.) but men had a higher achieved combined prominence than women (p < 0.001). PROMs did not correlate with the average gap (p = n.s.) nor with combined prominence (p = n.s.). Two patients underwent an early revision. Lower femoral prominence was a significant predictor of revision (p = 0.045; OR = 0.21; 95% CI 0.000-0.918).
conclusionFemale patients need less component prominence to achieve the same average gap balance through a range of motion, without correlation with patient's height. Intraoperatively low femoral prominence could be a reason for early revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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.