Trial reportActa orthopaedica2023
No difference in clinical outcome but in RSA in total knee arthroplasty with the ATTUNE vs. the PFC Sigma: a randomized trial with 2-year follow-up.
Trial report in Acta orthopaedica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of patient specific instruments compared with conventional instruments in total knee arthroplasty : a randomized controlled trial.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Trial
- Assessment of improvement in functional outcomes between a novel knee replacement design and conventional designs in 240 patients: a randomized controlled trial.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Trial
- Early tibial loosening in the Attune total knee arthroplasty system: a retrieval analysis of clinical, demographic, and implant-related factors.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Variation in KOOS JR improvement across total knee implant designs: a cohort study from Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative.Acta orthopaedica · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeDespite usage of the ATTUNE total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for about 10 years, few randomized trials exist. We evaluated whether the ATTUNE CR design showed improved clinical results compared with the PFC Sigma CR after 2 years and if there was a difference in tibial component migration. PATIENTS AND
methods96 patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomly treated with cemented ATTUNE or PFC Sigma TKA. 42 patients with the ATTUNE and 48 with the PFC Sigma attended the 2-year follow-up. Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs), migration measured with RSA, implant position, and the development of radiolucent zones were studied. Non-parametric tests and repeated measures analysis were used at the statistical evaluation.
resultsThe Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at 2 years (primary outcome) and neither of the secondary PROM outcomes differed between the groups (mean difference OKS ATTUNE - PFC: -0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.9 to 2.7). RSA showed posterior tilt of the tibial component in the ATTUNE group with proximal lift-off anteriorly and subsidence of the tibial tray posteriorly. In contrast, the PFC Sigma tibial component tilted forward (mean difference ATTUNE - PFC: -0.7°, CI -1.1° to -0.4°) with maximum subsidence in the front and maximum lift-off of the posterior edge. The postoperative implant positions and the extension of radiolucent lines around the tibial component at 2 years did not differ.
conclusionWe found no significant differences in clinical outcome between the 2 groups but minor differences in migration pattern of the tibial component. The clinical long-term significance of this finding if any is not known.
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.