ArticleOperative Orthopadie und Traumatologie2020
Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using the in situ referencing technique.
Article in Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revision arthroplasty with rotating hinge systems for total knee arthroplasty instability.Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRevision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the in situ referencing technique aiming to preserve as much ligament function and epi-metaphyseal bone stock as possible. INDICATIONS: Aseptic loosening, progression of osteoarthritis, periprosthetic fracture, periprosthetic infection, arthrofibrosis, polyethylene wear, malalignment, instability, femoro-tibial impingement. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Unexplained pain, localized or systemic active infection (anywhere). SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Referencing for the tibia and the femur cuts is performed prior to implant removal. The tibial cutting jig and the initial tibial resection level is set in a way that the sawblade just fits under the tibial implant. In case too much bone needs to be removed to achieve flush implant sitting on both the medial and lateral tibia, a step cut needs to be performed to build up the medial defect with an augment. Prior to femoral component removal, rotational alignment is determined and intramedullary referencing for the distal femur osteotomy is performed. Level of constraint and additional tibial stem fixation is chosen according to the amount of bone resected and according to ligament stability. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Sterile dressings and elastic compression bandaging. No limitation of active/passive range of motion. Full weight-bearing or partial weight-bearing for 2 weeks postoperatively in the presence of bone or soft tissue defects.
resultsBetween 2008 and 2019, 84 patients underwent revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The mean follow-up was 64 months (range 3-132 months). Implant survival after revision of UKA to TKA was 92% (95% CI = 82-97%) at 5 years of follow-up and 86% (95% CI = 69-93%) at 10 years of follow-up. The mean Oxford knee score was 20.1 (6-39, SD ± 6.5) preoperatively and 30.2 (3-48, SD ± 11.3) postoperatively. The mean visual analogue scale was 6.9 (range 1-10, SD ± 1.8) preoperatively and 3.9 (range 0-9, SD ± 2.6) postoperatively.
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.