ArticleCureus2024
Angle Accuracy of Intramedullary Bone Resection Guides for Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The importance of proper prosthetic placement has been confirmed in numerous studies. The objective of this study was to compare the planned resection angles to the verified intraoperative angles of femoral and tibial varus/valgus, tibial slope, and femoral flexion for each total knee performed using intramedullary (IM) cut guides for both distal femur and proximal tibia cuts. A total of 1,000 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) were evaluated for this study. Intraoperative cut-check technology was used to show real-time validation of these resection angles. Assuming an acceptable range of within 2° of the planned cuts, results show the femoral varus/valgus angles were 75% accurate, the femoral flexion angles were 50.8% accurate, the tibial cuts were 95.2% accurate in the coronal plane, and the tibial slope was the least accurate with only 50.3% within the acceptable range. This showed that IM guides are reasonably accurate in producing desired angles in the coronal plane but less accurate in the sagittal plane, with a greater number of outliers in femoral flexion and posterior slope. Surgeons need to be aware of potential cutting errors when using IM guides as they affect the overall alignment of the implant, and real-time verification technology is available to verify the accuracy of the cuts.
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.