ArticleOrthopedic reviews2020
Sensor guided unicompartmental to total knee arthroplasty revision: Surgical technique.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensors and digital medicine in orthopaedic surgery.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2022Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) is an effective surgical option for managing unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis; it represents 10% of all knee arthroplasties worldwide, increasing 32.5% annually in the United States alone. Despite evolution in surgical technique and implant design, success rate and long-term survivorship of UKA have been historically lower than Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). The most common causes of UKA failure leading to revision are polyethylene wear, progression of arthritis, aseptic loosening and patella-femoral symptoms due to poor patient selection in many cases. Historically, UKA revisions have presented technical challenges mainly related to managing residual bone defects and ligament insufficiency ultimately leading to knee instability: the fear of instability has often pushed surgeons to lower the threshold for an increase of the intra-articular level of constraint. Unfortunately, the use of more constrained implants requires sacrificing bone stock and has been related to higher rates of re-revision secondary to recurrence of aseptic loosening. Because of these challenges, the authors developed a surgical technique that could combine balancing the knee during revision surgery with the use of the less constrained polyethylene option. To achieve this, we started evaluating a novel device (VERASENSE, Orthosensor, FL) designed to support soft tissue balancing during primary TKA. This intraoperative sensing technology dynamically quantifies intra-articular loads during TKA trial with the goal of correcting any residual imbalance in real time. Herein we propose a novel surgical technique, which might allow use of a primary TKA design characterized by a lower level of constraint, instead of a constrained or hinged revision knee system, during UKA revision. A key aspect of this technique is the use of sensing technology during intraoperative stability testing.
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.