Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36587259›Full record

Trial reportThe bone & joint journal2023

Fluoroscopic and radiostereometric analysis of a bicruciate-retaining versus a posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

Kelly Mills, Ate B Wymenga, Menno R Bénard, Bart L Kaptein, Koen C Defoort, Gijs G van Hellemondt, Petra J C Heesterbeek

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The bone & joint journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Evaluation of a novel robotic testing method for stability and kinematics of total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kelly MillsSint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9596-9425
Ate B WymengaSint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Menno R BénardSint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Bart L KapteinDepartment of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Koen C DefoortSint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Gijs G van HellemondtSint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Petra J C HeesterbeekSint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2873-8907
Sint Maartenskliniek · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe aim of this study was to compare a bicruciate-retaining (BCR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with a posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) TKA design in terms of kinematics, measured using fluoroscopy and stability as micromotion using radiostereometric analysis (RSA).

methodsA total of 40 patients with end-stage osteoarthritis were included in this randomized controlled trial. All patients performed a step-up and lunge task in front of a monoplane fluoroscope one year postoperatively. Femorotibial contact point (CP) locations were determined at every flexion angle and compared between the groups. RSA images were taken at baseline, six weeks, three, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Clinical and functional outcomes were compared postoperatively for two years.

resultsThe BCR-TKA demonstrated a kinematic pattern comparable to the natural knee's screw-home mechanism in the step-up task. In the lunge task, the medial CP of the BCR-TKA was more anterior in the early flexion phase, while laterally the CP was more posterior during the entire movement cycle. The BCR-TKA group showed higher tibial migration. No differences were found for the clinical and functional outcomes.

conclusionThe BCR-TKA shows a different kinematic pattern in early flexion/late extension compared to the CR-TKA. The difference between both implants is mostly visible in the flexion phase in which the anterior cruciate ligament is effective; however, both designs fail to fully replicate the motion of a natural knee. The higher migration of the BCR-TKA was concerning and highlights the importance of longer follow-up.Cite this article:

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisOsteoarthritis, KneePosterior Cruciate LigamentAnterior Cruciate LigamentBiomechanical PhenomenaFluoroscopyHumansKnee JointRadiostereometric AnalysisRange of Motion, ArticularACLanterior cruciate ligament (ACL)BCRBicruciate-retainingClinical and functional outcomesCRCruciate-retainingcruciate-retaining total knee arthroplastyflexionflexion anglesFluoroscopykinematicsKneeRadiostereometric analysisRadiostereometric analysis (RSA)randomized controlled trialRSATKATotal knee arthroplastytotal knee arthroplasty (TKA)

Identifiers

PMID36587259
PMCPMC9948430
OpenAlexW4313441155

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.