ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2022
Posterior-Stabilized Versus Cruciate-Retaining Prostheses for Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Risk of Bias Considerations.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of functional outcomes between cruciate-retaining and posterior-stabilized knee prostheses in obese patients.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Comparison of early outcomes of primary total knee arthroplasties performed using subvastus and medial parapatellar approaches and evaluation of quadriceps muscle elastography.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Load-Dependent Characteristics of Cruciate-Retaining and Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Biomechanical Study.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2024Article
- Developing a Machine-Learning Predictive Model for Retention of Posterior Cruciate Ligament in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Posterior stabilised total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved post-operative knee specific function, health related quality of life and greater satisfaction when compared to cruciate retaining protheses.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Numerous systematic reviews have been published comparing the outcomes of patients undergoing posterior stabilized (PS) versus cruciate-retaining (CR) procedures in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but with some overlaps and contradictions. The objectives of this study were (1) to perform an overview of current systematic reviews comparing PS versus CR in TKA, by evaluating their methodological quality and risk of bias, and (2) to provide recommendations through the best evidence. Methods: A systematic search of systematic reviews comparing PS and CR in TKA, published until June 2021 was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Included systematic reviews were assessed for methodological quality and risk of bias by the AMSTAR2 instrument and ROBIS tool, respectively. The choice of best evidence was conducted according to the Jadad decision algorithm. Results: A total of eight systematic reviews were eligible for inclusion in this study. The Jadad decision algorithm suggested that reviews with the highest AMSTAR2 scores should be selected. According to the ROBIS tool, there were three reviews with a low risk of bias and five with a high risk of bias. Consequently, one systematic review conducted by Verra et al. with the highest AMSTAR2 score and low risk of bias was selected as the best evidence. Conclusions: Although current systematic reviews demonstrated some statistical differences in clinical presentation and functional outcomes between PS and CR, the current outcome indicators cannot be taken to provide recommendations for undergoing PS or CR. The decision for prosthesis selection could be made mostly based on the surgeon's preference, indications and other indicators.
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.