Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32189946›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2020

Comparative study of existing knee prosthesis with anthropometry of Indian patients and other races, a computer tomography 3D reconstruction-based study.

A V Gurava Reddy, Sukesh Rao Sankineani, Rahul Agrawal, Chiranjeevi Thayi

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2020. 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 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A V Gurava ReddyPrimary and Revision Arthroplasty Unit, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Sunshine Hospital, Penderghast Road, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500003, India.
Sukesh Rao SankineaniPrimary and Revision Arthroplasty Unit, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Sunshine Hospital, Penderghast Road, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500003, India.
Rahul AgrawalPrimary and Revision Arthroplasty Unit, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Sunshine Hospital, Penderghast Road, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500003, India.
Chiranjeevi ThayiPrimary and Revision Arthroplasty Unit, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Sunshine Hospital, Penderghast Road, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500003, India.
Sunshine Hospitals · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Appropriate component sizing plays an important role in determining the functional outcome following total knee arthroplasty. Comparative studies of different populations have shown significant differences in the anthropometric parameters of knees in different race groups which negates the possibility of using a single sized implant system across different ethnic groups. This study evaluates the dimensions of femoral and tibial articular surfaces of Indian patients and compares the parameters with other ethnic groups and correlates the dimensions with five different commercially available knee systems.Material & Methods: Computerized tomography (CT) scans of contralateral normal knees of patients who underwent the scan for various ailments of the knee were retrieved retrospectively from the hospital database and 3D reconstruction of the images was done. Mediolateral dimensions (fML,tML), Anteroposterior dimensions (fAP, tAP) and aspect ratio (fML/fAP, tML/tAP) of the femur and tibia respectively were calculated and compared with the dimensions of different ethnic groups as well as the femoral and tibial components of five different knee prosthesis systems.

resultsThe average fML in the study group was less than that of Caucasian knees but was marginally larger than other ethnic groups. The fAP, tML and tAP was found to be smaller than all other ethnic groups but a larger femoral aspect ratio was reported than other ethnic groups. Among the implant systems, only NexGen LPS and Scorpio NRG implant femoral components closely matched the femoral dimensions in the study group whereas all implant systems showed significant mismatch with tibial component dimensions when compared to the study populations.

conclusionThis study concludes that the dimensions of Indian knees are different from other ethnic groups and the use of commercially available knee Implants designed based on measurements in Caucasian populations can lead to significant mismatch between implant and resected bone surfaces.

Indexed as

Component mismatchEthnic groupsIndianKnee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID32189946
PMCPMC7067989
OpenAlexW2942035430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.