Trial reportThe Journal of arthroplasty2023
John N. Insall Award: Randomized Clinical Trial of Cementless Versus Cemented Tibial Components: Durable and Reliable at a Mean 10-Years Follow-Up.
Trial report in The Journal of arthroplasty, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Research progress of cementless prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Review
- Five-year implant survival does not differ between hybrid and cementless total knee arthroplasty in a cohort of 5361 patients using a deep-dish mobile bearing design.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Long-term Performance and Durability of Biomaterials and Implant Designs in Total Joint Arthroplasty and Spinal Fusion.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2026Article
- Novel Clinical Applications of 3D-Printed Highly Porous Titanium for Off-the-Shelf Cementless Joint Replacement Prostheses.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Fixation in total knee arthroplasty: are cemented implants still mandatory in younger and obese patients?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Review
- Long-Term Outcomes of Cementless Versus Hybrid Cemented Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- What Is the Survivorship of TKA With a Twin-peg or Spikes-and-keel Cementless Implant Compared With Cemented? A Registry-based Cohort Study.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Article
- Trend of using cementless total knee arthroplasty: a nationwide analysis from 2015 to 2021.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCementless fixation is gaining popularity for primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). The prior 5-year results of our randomized clinical trial that included 3 different tibial designs found minimal differences. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the 10-year results in the same cohort.
methodsBetween 2003 and 2006, 389 primary TKAs were randomized: traditional modular cemented tibia (135); hybrid (cemented baseplate with uncemented pegs) monoblock tibia (128); and cementless monoblock tibia (126). Implant survivorships, radiographs, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Mean age at TKA was 68 years (range, 41 to 85), 46% were male, and mean body mass index was 32 (range, 21 to 59). The mean follow-up was 10 years.
resultsThe 10-year survivorship free of any revision was similar between the hybrid monoblock and cementless monoblock groups at 96%, but lower (89%) for the traditional modular cemented tibia (P = .05). The traditional modular cemented tibia group had significantly more revisions for aseptic tibial loosening than the other 2 groups (7 versus 0%) at 10 years (P = .003). The traditional modular cemented tibia group had significantly more nonprogressive radiolucent lines than the hybrid and cementless monoblock groups (24, 12, and 9%, respectively). Clinical outcomes were similar and excellent between all 3 groups.
conclusionCementless and hybrid monoblock tibial components have excellent implant survivorship (96%) with no cases of aseptic tibial loosening to date. The traditional cemented modular tibial group had a 7% cumulative incidence of aseptic loosening at 10 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, Prospective Randomized Control Trial.
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.