ArticleMusculoskeletal surgery2025
Medial congruent with posterior cruciate ligament resected achieves similar short term outcome as posterior stabilised total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2025. 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.
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
introductionMedial congruent (MC) systems and Posterior stabilized (PS) systems are widely utilized as implant options in total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). Nevertheless, determining which system yields superior clinical outcomes remains unresolved. This study seeks to compare these two systems by conducting a retrospective analysis of data from a single surgeon's registry encompassing both systems. Evaluation parameters consist of range of motion (ROM) and various clinical scoring systems.
methodsA retrospective analysis of data from a single surgeon's registry compared 45 MC with PCL resected (MC-PCLR) TKAs with 44 PS TKAs. Inclusion criteria comprised primary knee osteoarthritis with a minimum 1-year follow-up, while exclusion criteria involved secondary knee osteoarthritis and revision TKAs. Range of motion, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Scoring System (KS) Function Score (KS-FS), and KS Knee Score (KS-KS) were assessed preoperatively, at 3 months, and at 12 months postoperatively. Statistical analysis was performed on retrieved data.
resultsBoth group has similar baseline demographics in terms of gender (68% vs. 73% female, p = 0.60), BMI (26.4 ± 5.7 vs. 28.3 ± 5.1 p = 0.81) and American Society for Anaesthesiology score (75% vs. 84% score of 2, p = 0.12), with the exception of age where the PS group is significantly greater (71 ± 8 vs. 66 ± 7 years, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in range of motion (ROM), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Scoring System (KS) Function Score (KS-FS) and KS Knee Score (KS-KS) for all time periods except for one time stamp where preoperatively, the preoperative KS Knee Score (KS-KS) was significantly lower in the PS group. However, when comparing the change between KS-KS of pre-operation and 3 months post operation (44 ± 18 vs. 31 ± 18,p < 0.01), and pre-operation and 1 year post operation (46 ± 16 vs. 34 ± 17,p < 0.01), it is found to be significantly higher in the PS group for both time periods. All other comparisons between the three time periods were found to have similar parameters.
conclusionsPS and MC-PCLR demonstrates similar outcomes at the 1-year mark. However PS exhibits a faster rate of improvement from pre-operation to 3 months as compared to MC-PCLR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39572475What 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.