Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35128014›Full record

ArticleArthroplasty today2022

Comparison of Biomechanical Gait Parameters and Patient-Reported Outcome in Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty With the Use of Fixed-Bearing Medial Pivot and Multi-radius Design Implants-Retrospective Matched-Cohort Study.

Artur Stolarczyk, Bartosz M Maciąg, Marcin Mostowy, Grzegorz J Maciąg, Piotr Stępiński, Jakub Szymczak, Krystian Żarnovsky, Maciej Świercz, Łukasz Oleksy, Magda Stolarczyk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroplasty today, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Step-by-step insight into gait analysis: A narrative review unlocking knee biomechanics.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Artur StolarczykDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Bartosz M MaciągDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Marcin MostowyMedical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.
Grzegorz J MaciągDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Piotr StępińskiDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Jakub SzymczakDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Krystian ŻarnovskyDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Maciej ŚwierczDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Łukasz OleksyDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Magda Stolarczyk3rd Clinic of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Medical University of Warsaw · PLMedical University of Lodz · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) is considered to be highly successful in treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis. There are multiple implant designs available on the market, and it is difficult to point which one is the best. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcomes and gait pattern after TKA with the use of fixed-bearing medial pivot (K-Mod) vs multi-radius design (NexGen) implants and to compare them to norms for healthy patients with no osteoarthritis or arthroplasty procedure in anamnesis.

methodsA group of 30 patients who received the medial pivot (MP) TKA and 33 patients who received the posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA between May and August of 2018 were included. All surgeries were performed in the level III academic hospital by a single surgeon. Every patient was asked to fulfill the The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Standard X-ray, biomechanical gait analysis using a motion capture system, and statistical analysis were performed at 2 years postoperatively.

resultsA total of 28 patients from either MP cohort (93%) or PS (85%) matched-control cohort completed the whole assessment at the final follow-up. There were statistically significant differences in a few gait parameters such as shorter mean step length both in operated and healthy limb, lower mean gait velocity, and lower mean walking cadence than the norm in both MP and PS groups. As to the WOMAC score, there was statistically significant improvement in both groups comparing preoperative and postoperative outcomes. Nevertheless, in the MP group, there was a significantly higher score, indicating worse outcomes, in the stiffness part of the WOMAC score than in the PS group. No significant differences were found between groups during radiological evaluation.

conclusionsThere were satisfying and promising clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes in both MP and PS groups with very little difference in relation to norm values. However, both implants failed in fully restoring gait patterns similar to the healthy limb of the same patient.

Indexed as

gait parametersK-Modmedial pivotmulti radiusNexGentotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID35128014
PMCPMC8799913
OpenAlexW4207065538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.