ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Good Mid-Term Implant Survival of a Novel Single-Design Rotating-Hinge Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mid- to Long-Term Follow-Up Outcomes of Single Design Rotating Hinge Knee in Infected and Noninfected Revision Patients.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of standard primary vs. primary rotating hinge total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective matched-pair analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Revision of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Not as uncomplicated as one thought? Analysis of survival and re-revisions from a single centre.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRotating-hinge knee (RHK) implants are an option for knee arthroplasty in cases of instability or severe bone loss. However, the revision rate can be increased compared to unconstrained implants which mandate improvements in implant design. This study investigates a novel RHK design for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
methodsRetrospective analysis of a single design RHK TKA (GenuX MK, Implantcast) implanted between 2015 and 2019 including 133 patients (21 primary TKA, 112 revisions). The main indication for revision TKA was second-stage reimplantation following infection. The median follow-up amounted to 30 months (IQR 22-47).
resultsIn total, 13% (18/133) of patients underwent revision surgery after a mean time of 1 month (IQR 0-6). The main reason for the revision was (re-) infection in 8% of patients. All revisions were performed following revision TKA and none following primary TKA. There were no revision surgeries for loosening or instability. The revision-free implant survival of 83% was (95% CI 75-91%) after five years. A higher number of previous surgeries was associated with a greater revision risk (
conclusionRevision and complex primary TKA using a single-design RHK implant results in good implant survival at mid-term follow-up although infection remains a major concern.
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.