Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38396020›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024

Biomechanical comparison of all-polyethylene total knee replacement and its metal-backed equivalent on periprosthetic tibia using the finite element method.

Vasileios Apostolopoulos, Petr Boháč, Petr Marcián, Luboš Nachtnebl, Michal Mahdal, Lukáš Pazourek, Tomáš Tomáš

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [Finite element analysis of tibial and femoral resection configurations on varus alignment in total knee arthroplasty].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Vasileios ApostolopoulosFirst Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Petr BoháčInstitute of Solid Mechanics, Mechatronics and Biomechanics, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Technology, Brno, Czech Republic.
Petr MarciánInstitute of Solid Mechanics, Mechatronics and Biomechanics, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Technology, Brno, Czech Republic.
Luboš NachtneblFirst Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Michal MahdalFirst Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Lukáš PazourekFirst Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Tomáš TomášFirst Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. tomas.tomas@fnusa.cz.
St. Anne's University Hospital Brno · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) with all-polyethylene tibial (APT) components has shown comparable survivorship and clinical outcomes to that with metal-backed tibial (MBT). Although MBT is more frequently implanted, APT equivalents are considered a low-cost variant for elderly patients. A biomechanical analysis was assumed to be suitable to compare the response of the periprosthetic tibia after implantation of TKA NexGen APT and MBT equivalent.

methodsA standardised load model was used representing the highest load achieved during level walking. The geometry and material models were created using computed tomography data. In the analysis, a material model was created that represents a patient with osteopenia.

resultsThe equivalent strain distribution in the models of cancellous bone with an APT component showed values above 1000 με in the area below the medial tibial section, with MBT component were primarily localised in the stem tip area. For APT variants, the microstrain values in more than 80% of the volume were in the range from 300 to 1500 με, MBT only in less than 64% of the volume.

conclusionThe effect of APT implantation on the periprosthetic tibia was shown as equal or even superior to that of MBT despite maximum strain values occurring in different locations. On the basis of the strain distribution, the state of the bone tissue was analysed to determine whether bone tissue remodelling or remodelling would occur. Following clinical validation, outcomes could eventually modify the implant selection criteria and lead to more frequent implantation of APT components.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisAgedFinite Element AnalysisHumansMetalsPolyethyleneProsthesis DesignTibiaMetalsPolyethyleneAll-polyethylene tibial componentComputational modelingFEAFinite element methodKnee replacementMetal-backed tibial componentTKRTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID38396020
PMCPMC10893603
OpenAlexW4392099152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.