Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32618563›Full record

ArticleSICOT-J2020

No clinical benefit from gender-specific total knee replacement implants: a systematic review.

Elliot Sappey-Marinier, John Swan, Cécile Batailler, Elvire Servien, Sébastien Lustig

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elliot Sappey-MarinierFIFA Medical Center of Excellence, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Croix-Rousse Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0902-5760
John SwanFIFA Medical Center of Excellence, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Croix-Rousse Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France.
Cécile BataillerFIFA Medical Center of Excellence, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Croix-Rousse Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France.
Elvire ServienFIFA Medical Center of Excellence, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Croix-Rousse Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France - LIBM - EA 7424, Interuniversity Laboratory of Biology of Mobility, Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University, 69100 Villeurbanne, France.
Sébastien LustigFIFA Medical Center of Excellence, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Croix-Rousse Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France - Univ. Lyon, Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University, IFSTTAR, LBMC UMR_T9406, 69622 Lyon, France.
Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse · FRUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Gender-specific designSystematic reviewTotal knee arthroplastyTotal knee replacementUnisex design

Identifiers

PMID32618563
PMCPMC7333614
OpenAlexW3040518870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.