Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35379289›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2022

Kinematic alignment versus mechanical alignment in primary total knee arthroplasty: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Binfeng Liu, Chengyao Feng, Chao Tu

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06507046 (Robotic Assisted Surgery Comparing Personalized Alignment Versus Mechanical Alignment of Total Knee Arthroplasty - A Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 61 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06507046 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Robotic Assisted Surgery Comparing Personalized Alignment Versus Mechanical Alignment of Total Knee Arthroplasty - A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHelse Møre og Romsdal HFRan2024 to 2035Enrolled152ConditionsKnee OsteoarthritisArmsTotal knee replacement
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

61 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Binfeng LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Chengyao FengDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Chao TuDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China. tuchao@csu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8267-4727

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81902745
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of kinematic alignment (KA) and mechanical alignment (MA) in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. Eligible randomized controlled trials regarding the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty with KA and MA were included for the analysis.

resultsA total of 1112 participants were included in this study, including 559 participants with KA and 553 patients with MA. This study revealed that the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Knee Society Score (knee and combined), and knee flexion range were better in the patients with kinematic alignment than in the mechanical alignment. In terms of radiological results, the femoral knee angle, mechanical medial proximal tibial angle, and joint line orientation angle were significantly different between the two techniques. Perioperatively, the walk distance before discharge was longer in the KA group than in the MA group. In contrast, other functional outcomes, radiological results, perioperative outcomes, and postoperative complication rates were similar in both the kinematic and mechanical alignment groups.

conclusionsThe KA technique achieved better functional outcomes than the mechanical technique in terms of KSS (knee and combined), WOMAC scores, and knee flexion range. PROSPERO trial registration number CRD42021264519. Date registration: July 28, 2021.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeOsteoarthritis, KneeHumansKnee JointKnee ProsthesisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicKinematic alignmentMechanical alignmentMeta-analysisTotal knee arthroplastyTotal knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID35379289
PMCPMC8981671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.