Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37491199›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023

Differences in joint line level and posterior condylar offset during total knee replacement with use of gap-balancing and measured resection techniques-matched cohort study.

Bartosz M Maciąg, Tomasz Kordyaczny, Dawid Jegierski, Marcin Łapiński, Monika Dorocińska, Krystian Żarnovsky, Grzegorz J Maciąg, Olga Adamska, Artur Stolarczyk

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04164147 (Comparison of the Persona Medial Congruent Retained Posterior-Cruciate Ligament vs. Persona Posterior-stabilized vs. NexGen Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty a Randomised Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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.

NCT04164147 naunknown statusnot on this map

Comparison of the Persona Medial Congruent Retained Posterior-Cruciate Ligament vs. Persona Posterior-stabilized vs. NexGen Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty a Randomised Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedical University of WarsawRan2020 to 2022Enrolled100ConditionsKnee Osteoarthritis, Knee Arthritis, Joint, Arthrosis, PrimaryArmsTotal knee replacement, CT scan, Biomechanics, one of the Persona MC Retained PCL, Persona MC Sacrificed PCL and NexGen PS total knee implant
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bartosz M MaciągDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland. bmaciag@wum.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0311-3735
Tomasz KordyacznyDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Dawid JegierskiDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Marcin ŁapińskiDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Monika DorocińskaDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Krystian ŻarnovskyDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Grzegorz J MaciągDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Olga AdamskaDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Artur StolarczykDepartment of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Medical University of Warsaw, Międzyleski Specialist Hospital, Str. 2 Bursztynowa, 04-749, Warsaw, Poland.
Medical University of Warsaw · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTotal knee replacement (TKR) is considered one of the most common elective orthopaedic procedures. The main focus of TKR is to offer patient's symptomatic relief from persistent knee pain. To achieve this it is crucial to restore joint biomechanics by performing proper bone cuts. Some surgeons favor the measured resection technique, others prefer gap balancing technique. The researchers of the presented study performed TKR using these two techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative change in joint line and posterior condylar offset after TKR with use of anatomic knee design implants between gap balancing and measured resection techniques.

methodsTwo hundred twenty-five X-rays of patients who underwent TKR performed by a single surgeon between 2020 and 2021 were analyzed. The first group of patients (101) was operated with the use of gap balancing technique and the second group (124) was operated with the use of measured resection technique. Patients included in the study were > 50 years of age, had confirmed primary knee osteoarthritis, underwent primary TKR with a PS (posterior stabilized) knee implants without patella resurfacing and had at least 15 degree flexion contracture. T-student test and U Mann-Whitney test were used in statistical analysis of results, according to the normality of distribution examined with the Shapiro-Wilk test. Post-hoc analysis was performed using the Dwass-Steel-Crichtlow-Fligner test (DSCF).

resultsThe postoperative analysis showed a significantly elevated joint line level in the gap balancing group (-2.6 ± 4.1 vs -0.7 ± 4.8, p < 0.0005). In the gap balancing group significantly more patients had joint lines elevated > 2 mm comparing to measured resection technique. The difference between pre- and postoperative PCO (posterior condylar offset) and PCOR (posterior condylar offset ratio) results had no significant differences (100.8 ± 11.8 vs 101 ± 12.5, p > 0.05) between the groups.

conclusionsThe results of the study suggest that when it comes to restoring joint line level measured resection technique seems to be superior in comparison to the gap balancing technique. What is more, results indicate measured resection is equal in terms of restoring posterior condylar offset to the gap balancing technique.

trial registrationNCT04164147, date of registration: November 14, 2019.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisOsteoarthritis, KneeCohort StudiesHumansKnee JointMiddle AgedRange of Motion, ArticularGap balancing techniqueJoint line levelMeasured resection techniqueTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID37491199
PMCPMC10367383
OpenAlexW4385233747

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.