ReviewDer Orthopade2021
[Transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems after major amputation of the lower extremity : A retrospective 3-year analysis].
Review in Der Orthopade, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Motion analysis in Orthopaedic technology research].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- [Osseointegration in amputation surgery : Representative studies].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- [Transcutaneous osseointegrated prostheses systems (TOPS) for rehabilitation following limb loss : Surgical approach for necessary removal of the implant].Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2025Article
- Impact of topography and added TiN-coating on adult human dermal fibroblasts after seeding on titanium surface in-vitro.Journal of biomaterials applications · 2024Article
- Biomimetic Connection of Transcutaneous Implants with Skin.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Osseointegrated prostheses for the rehabilitation of patients with transfemoral amputations: A prospective ten-year cohort study of patient-reported outcomes and complications.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2023Article
- Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- [Functional rehabilitation after transfemoral amputation : Shaft prosthesis or endo-exo prosthesis?]Der Unfallchirurg · 2022Review
- Twenty-four months of bacterial colonialization and infection rates in patients with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems after lower limb amputation-A prospective analysis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Preoperative femoral abduction angle correlates with initial postoperative lateral hip pain after transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic system (TOPS) in transfemoral amputees.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTranscutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) are an established optional procedure for the prosthetic treatment of amputations. Under the term endo-exo-prosthesis (EEP), the endosteal adapted exo-prosthesis (Dr. Grundei®) is currently used as the only standard prosthesis for clinical application in Germany. The prosthetic treatment with EEP involves a two-stage surgical procedure. In a first surgical step, the endo-fixed stem is implanted into the bone; in a second operation, approx. 2-6 weeks later, the skin/soft tissue stoma is created, through which the exoprosthetic components can be coupled transcutaneously.
aimThe aim of this manuscript was to retrospectively collect descriptive 3‑year statistics (2017-2019) from clinical follow-ups and to analyze them with regard to possible effects of TOPS on the mobility level measured by k‑levels. In addition, a brief description of the current standard of care in Germany regarding TOPS will be given.
methodsAll patients who underwent EEP after major amputation from February 2017 to December 2019 (n = 72, with 76 implants) were included in this study. The data of the EEP patients were collected in standardized follow-ups. K‑levels were compared preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively.
resultsA total of N = 72 patients (N = 76 implantations) was analyzed in the described period. The main cause of amputations was trauma (68.9%). Main complications were myofascial complaints. Implant loosening and deep infections were observed in two cases (2.7%) during this period. Stoma problems occurred with a 3-year average of 25.7%. In terms of K‑levels, there was a high significant increase from preoperative 1.8 ± 0.8 to 3.0 ± 0.4 after a 6-month period.
conclusionTOPS is an established optional procedure for the treatment of limb loss. In Germany, only one implant is currently regularly implanted (endo-exo prosthesis), and the restoration is currently focused on the lower limb. The restoration of patients with major amputation of the lower extremity by means of TOPS can lead to an increase in mobility and, thus, to an increase in daily activities and participation in daily living.
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.