ArticleInternational orthopaedics2021
Significant differences in rates of aseptic loosening between two variations of a popular total knee arthroplasty design.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation of revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical studies and worldwide arthroplasty registers.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Survival of primary total knee arthroplasty in a modern anatomic implant with and without a short stem extension.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Short-term survival of the cementless triathlon total knee arthroplasty in a young patient cohort.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Over a decade of experience in total knee arthroplasty with a multiradius design and fixed bearing at a single centre: Data from the Catalan Arthroplasty Registry.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Comparison of traditional PS versus kinematically designs in primary total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- High rate of tibial debonding and failure in a popular knee replacement : a follow-up review.Bone & joint open · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe NexGen Legacy Posterior Stabilised (LPS) prosthesis (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) has augmentable and non-augmentable tibial baseplate options. We have noted an anecdotal increase in the number of cases requiring early revision for aseptic loosening since adopting the non-augmentable option. The purpose of this study was to ascertain our rates of aseptic tibial loosening for the two implant types within five years of implantation and to investigate the causes for any difference observed.
methodsA database search was performed for all patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using the NexGen LPS between 2009 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted to assess for differences in revision rates between cohorts. We collected and compared data on gender, age, body mass index, component alignment and cement mantle quality as these were factors thought to affect the likelihood of aseptic loosening.
resultsTwo thousand one hundred seventy-two TKAs were included with five year follow-up. There were 759 augmentable knees of which 14 were revised and 1413 non-augmentable knees of which 48 were revised. The overall revision rate at five years was 1.84% in the augmentable cohort and 3.4% in the non-augmentable cohort. The revision rate for aseptic loosening was 0.26% in the augmentable group and 1.42% in the non-augmentable group (p = 0.0241).
conclusionsWe have identified increased rates of aseptic loosening in non-augmentable components. This highlights the effect that minor implant changes can have on outcomes. We recommend that clinicians remain alert to implant changes and publish their own results when important trends are observed.
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.