ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Investigation of Biomechanical Differences in Level Walking between Patients with Bilateral and Unilateral Total Knee Replacements.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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.
- Comparison of Three Internal Fixation Constructs for AO/OTA 33-A3 Distal Femoral Fractures: A Biomechanical Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the high risk of a bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKR) following unilateral TKR, this study was performed to investigate bilateral TKR patients. Specifically, we examined biomechanical differences between the first replaced and second replaced limbs of bilateral patients. Furthermore, we examined bilateral TKR effects on hip, knee, and ankle biomechanics, compared to the replaced and non-replaced limbs of unilateral patients. Eleven bilateral patients (70.09 ± 5.41 years, 1.71 ± 0.08 m, 91.78 ± 13.00 kg) and fifteen unilateral TKR patients (65.67 ± 6.18 years, 1.73 ± 0.10 m, 87.72 ± 15.70 kg) were analyzed while performing level walking. A repeated measures one-way ANOVA was performed to analyze between-limb differences within the bilateral TKR group. A 2 × 2 (limb × group) ANOVA was used to determine differences between bilateral and unilateral patients. Our results showed that the second replaced limb exhibited a lower peak initial-stance knee extension moment than the first replaced limb. No other kinematic or kinetic differences were found. Bilateral patients exhibited lower initial-stance knee extension moments, knee abduction moments, and dorsiflexion moments, compared to unilateral patients. Bilateral patients also exhibited lower push-off peak hip flexion moments and vertical GRF. The differences between the first and second replaced limbs of bilateral patients may indicate different adaptation strategies used following a second TKR. The significant group differences indicate that adaptations are different between these groups, and it is not recommended to use patients with unilateral and bilateral TKR together in gait analyses.
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.