SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2020
Similar revision rates in clinical studies and arthroplasty registers and no bias for developer publications in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of revision rates and epidemiological data of a single total knee arthroplasty system of different designs (cruciate retaining, posterior stabilized, mobile bearing, and fixed bearing): a meta-analysis and systematic review of clinical trials and national arthroplasty registries.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of age on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Pooled it
- Insufficient evidence to confirm benefits of custom partial knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Clinical radiographic outcomes and survivorship of medial pivot design total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of joint awareness after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy: a retrospective multicenter study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Application and Surgical Technique of ACL Reconstruction Using Worldwide Registry Datasets: What Can We Extract?Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOur aim was to assess the outcome with respect to cumulative revision rates of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) by comparing published literature and arthroplasty registry data. Our hypothesis was that there is a superior outcome of UKA described in dependent clinical studies compared to independent studies or arthroplasty registers.
methodsA systematic review of all clinical studies on UKA in the past decade was conducted with the main endpoint revision rate. Revision rate was calculated as "revision per 100 component years (CY)". The respective data were analysed with regard to a potential difference of the percentage of performed revision surgeries as described in dependent and independent clinical studies. Clinical data were further compared to arthroplasty registers in a systematic search algorithm.
resultsIn total, 48 study cohorts fulfilled our inclusion criteria and revealed 1.11 revisions per 100 CY. This corresponds to a revision rate of 11.1% after 10 years. No deviations with regard to revision rates for UKA among dependent and independent clinical literature were detected. Data from four arthroplasty registers showed lower survival rates after 10 years compared to published literature without being significant.
conclusionsThe outcomes of UKA in dependent and independent clinical studies do not differ significantly and are in line with arthroplasty register datasets. We cannot confirm biased results and the authors recommend the use of UKAs in properly selected patients by experts in their field.
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.