Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34350484›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2023

The posterolateral upslope of a low-conforming insert blocks the medial pivot during a deep knee bend in TKA: a comparative analysis of two implants with different insert conformities.

Connor M Delman, Delaney Ridenour, Stephen M Howell, Maury L Hull

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Connor M DelmanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Davis Medical Center, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3800, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA. cdelman@ucdavis.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5247-7378
Delaney RidenourDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, USA.
Stephen M HowellDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, 95616, USA.
Maury L HullDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Davis Medical Center, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3800, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA.
University of California, Davis · USUniversity of California Davis Medical Center · US

Funding

Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation 19-504
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTibial insert conformity in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is of interest due to the potential effect on tibiofemoral kinematics. This study determined differences in anterior-posterior movements of the femoral condyles, pivot locations, and internal tibial rotation in different arcs of flexion for two implants with different insert conformities in kinematically aligned TKA.

methodsTwenty-five patients treated with a medial and lateral low-conforming, posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) retaining (LC CR) implant followed by a medial ball-in-socket and flat, lateral PCL sacrificing (B-in-S CS) implant in the contralateral knee underwent single-plane fluoroscopy during a deep knee bend. Analysis following 3D-to-2D image registration determined tibiofemoral kinematics and patients completed validated outcome scores for both knees.

resultsThe mean follow-up of 1.6 ± 0.4 years for the knee with the B-in-S CS implant was shorter than the 2.7 ± 1.2 years for the LC CR implant. From 0º to 30º of flexion, a medial pivot occurred with the tibia rotating internally approximately 5º with both implants. From 30º to 90º, the pivot remained medial and internal rotation increased to 10º with the B-in-S CS implant. In contrast, neither femoral condyle moved more than 1 mm with the LC CR implant from 30º to 60º, but from 60º to 90º degrees, a lateral pivot occurred and internal rotation increased. Internal rotation of the tibia on the femur from 0° to maximum flexion occurred about a medial pivot similar to the native knee for the B-in-S CS implant and was 4.5° greater than that of the LC CR implant (10.4° vs 5.9°). There was no difference in the median patient-reported outcome scores between implant designs.

conclusionsTibial insert conformity is a primary determinant of a medial or lateral pivot during a deep knee bend. One explanation for the transition from a medial to lateral pivot between 30º and 60º with the LC CR implant is the chock-block effect of the insert's posterolateral upslope which impedes posterior movement of the lateral femoral condyle. Because there is no posterolateral upslope in the insert of the B-in-S CS implant, the tibia pivots medially throughout flexion similar to the native knee. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Indexed as

KneeAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeExerciseFemaleFemurHumansKnee ProsthesisMaleMiddle AgedRange of Motion, ArticularTibiaFemoral condyle movementImplant designInsert conformityInternal rotationLowest point methodPatient outcome scoresTotal knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID34350484
OpenAlexW3189710186

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.