ArticleSICOT-J2020
No clinical benefit from gender-specific total knee replacement implants: a systematic review.
Article in SICOT-J, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- No significant difference in early clinical outcomes of custom versus off-the-shelf total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Pooled it
- Sexual dimorphism and racial diversity render bone-implant mismatch inevitable after off-the-shelf total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Sex differences of proximal tibia anthropometry in a Chinese population: comparison with sizing of tibial implants.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Sexual dimorphism and allometry in human scapula shape.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Imprecise prediction of implant sizes with preoperative 2D digital templating in total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Observational
- Current concept of kinematic alignment total knee arthroplasty and its derivatives.Bone & joint open · 2022Article
- Short-term outcomes of total knee arthroplasty performed with and without a tourniquet.SICOT-J · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains the treatment of choice for severe osteoarthritis of the knee and nearly 60% of patients undergoing TKA are women. Females present three notable anatomic differences. Thus, gender-specific (GS) components were introduced to accommodate the females' anatomic differences. No systematic review has been published since 2014. The aim of this study was to perform a recent systematic review of the literature to determine whether there is any clinical benefit of gender-specific implants compared to conventional unisex implants in total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
methodsThis study included prospective randomized controlled trials (PRCTs) comparing clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications in TKA with gender-specific implants and conventional implants. All studies had a minimum follow-up of two years.
resultsThree PRCTs published between 2010 and 2012 were included. These studies showed a low risk of bias and were of very high quality. We did not find superior clinical outcomes for gender-specific prostheses compared to conventional prostheses. However, gender-specific TKA reduced the number of patients with femoral component overhang compared to conventional TKA.
conclusionIn our systematic review, despite a lower overhang rate, gender-specific implants in female TKA showed no clinical benefit over standard unisex implants. Good clinical results with significant improvement were observed with both designs. There is a notable absence of new studies on this subject in recent years, and further research needs to be performed using various gender-specific implant designs to further define the role of gender-specific implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, Level 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.