ArticleJournal of functional morphology and kinesiology2022
Intraoperative Load Sensing in Total Knee Arthroplasty Leads to a Functional but Not Clinical Difference: A Comparative, Gait Analysis Evaluation.
Article in Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Postoperative outcomes after conventional, robotic-arm-assisted, and pressure-sensor-guided cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Special Issue "Working Group in Sports Medicine".Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
- The Effect of a Cognitive Dual Task on Gait Parameters among Healthy Young Adults with Good and Poor Sleep Quality: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) is a successful procedure, a significant number of patients are still unsatisfied, reporting instability at the mid-flexion range (Mid-Flexion Instability-MFI). To avoid this complication, many innovations, including load sensors (LS), have been introduced. The intraoperative use of LS may facilitate the balance of the knee during the entire range of motion to avoid MFI postoperatively. The objective of this study was to perform a Gait Analysis (GA) evaluation of a series of patients who underwent primary TKA using a single LS technology.
methodsThe authors matched and compared two groups of patients treated with the same posterior stabilized TKA design. In Group A, 10 knees were intraoperatively balanced with LS technology, while 10 knees (Group B) underwent standard TKA. The correct TKA alignment was preoperatively determined aiming for a mechanical alignment. Clinical evaluation was performed according to the WOMAC, Knee Society Score (KSS) and Forgotten Joint Score, while functional evaluation was performed using a state-of-the-art GA platform.
resultsWe reported excellent clinical results in both groups without any statistical difference in patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs); from a functional standpoint, several GA space-time parameters were closer to normal in the sensor group when compared to the standard group, but a statistically significant difference was not reached.
conclusionsGait Analysis represents a valid method to evaluate TKA kinematics. This study, with its limitations, showed that pressure sensitive technology represents a valid aid for surgeons aiming to improve the postoperative stability of TKA; however, other factors (i.e., level of intra-articular constraint and alignment) may play a major role in reproducing the normal knee biomechanics.
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.