ArticleMedicine international
Biomechanical evaluation of screw and cement placement strategies for treating medial uncontained tibial defects in total knee arthroplasty: A finite element analysis.
Article in Medicine international. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cement and screw reconstruction for Rand type II bone defects during total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective clinical and radiographic evaluation.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Total knee arthroplasty faces challenges in the management of medial uncontained tibial defects, affecting prosthesis stability and implant survival. The use of screws and bone cement is a preferred approach; however, optimal screw insertion techniques lack consensus in the existing literature. The present study aimed to address this gap by exploring optimal screw and cement placement strategies, focusing on their biomechanical implications. The present study conducted a finite element analysis using a knee prosthesis model with a defined uncontained tibial defect. Various parameters were systematically adjusted, including the number of screws (1, 2 or 3 screws), screw lengths (10, 18, 30 or 40 mm), lateral-medial screw positions (2, 4 or 6 mm laterally) and abduction rotation angles (0, 5, 10 or 15 degrees). These adjustments were made to evaluate their specific and combined impacts on the vertical displacement and abduction angles of the tibial tray. The results revealed that incorporating three-screw reinforcement markedly reduced vertical displacement, while the single screw in the middle position exhibited superior performance in preventing the deformation of abduction angles compared to scenarios with two screws at anterior and posterior positions without a middle screw. Longer screws and smaller abduction angles contributed to decreased movement of the tibial component. Furthermore, the lateral adjustment of the screw position led to an increase in vertical displacement values, reaching ~1.5% when shifted 6 mm laterally. On the whole, the finite element analysis in the present study suggests that, for the treatment of medial uncontained tibial defects, three-screw reinforcement is advantageous for larger defects. Longer screws and a smaller abduction angle are deemed favorable. Moreover, the results underscore the superiority of medial screw placement over lateral placement. It is imperative to note that further clinical validation is essential to corroborate the biomechanical implications observed herein.
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.