Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35852187›Full record

ArticleJoint diseases and related surgery2022

Influence of the femoral entry point for intramedullary alignment in total knee arthroplasty: A computer-aided design approach.

Christoph Stotter, Erich Reiter, Werner Schretter, Philippe Reuter, Stefan Nehrer, Thomas Klestil

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Joint diseases and related surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Total versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2023
    Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christoph StotterDepartment For Health Sciences, Medicine and Research, Danube University Krems, 3500 Krems, Austria. christoph.stotter@moedling.lknoe.at.
Erich Reiter
Werner Schretter
Philippe Reuter
Stefan Nehrer
Thomas Klestil
Universität für Weiterbildung Krems · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to simulate different entry points and investigate potential angulation errors of the intramedullary device and resulting changes in the distal femoral cut using a computer-aided design (CAD) approach. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used a CAD approach to simulate various distal femoral entry points for intramedullary instrumentation. Simulations were performed on (i) a commercially available three-dimensional (3D) CAD model of a human femur (DigitalFemur) and (ii) a digital 3D model of an analogue large femur model produced using a coordinate measuring machine (FaroFemur). Divergent insertion points medial, lateral, anterior and posterior to the ideal position were simulated. Angulation deviations of the resulting positions of the intramedullary rod were measured and changes in the anatomical-mechanical axis angle were calculated. Differences between the two simulation models were quantified.

resultsThe ideal entry point in the FaroFemur was 9.9 mm anterior and 4.3 mm medial to the apex of the intercondylar notch, and 9.2 mm anterior and 3.6 mm medial in the DigitalFemur. A medial entry point increased the angle between the anatomical femoral axis and the alignment rod in the FaroFemur and DigitalFemur (with 5 mm displacement 2.510° and 2.363°, respectively; with 10 mm displacement 3.239° and 3.283°, respectively). In contrast, a lateral entry point decreased the angle between the anatomical femoral axis and the alignment rod (with 5 mm displacement 2.267° and 2.262°, respectively; with 10 mm displacement 3.158° and 3.731°, respectively). An anterior entry point changed the angle between the anatomical femoral axis and the alignment rod towards extension (1.802° in the FaroFemur; 2.142° in the DigitalFemur), while a posterior entry point generated a deviation toward flexion (2.045° in the FaroFemur; 2.055° in the DigitalFemur). The mean difference between the two models was 0.108±0.121° with the highest difference for anterior displacement.

conclusionMinor deviations of the entry point for intramedullary instrumentation during total knee arthroplasty can result in malalignment of several degrees.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeComputer-Aided DesignFemurHumansInternal FixatorsRange of Motion, Articular

Identifiers

PMID35852187
PMCPMC9361112
OpenAlexW4286377058

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.