ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Distinct knee phenotype variation: a comparative analysis of medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeLateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is relatively less common than medial UKA. There has been no comparative analysis of the constitutional phenotypes of knees that underwent medial and lateral UKA. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification of knees that underwent medial and lateral UKA. Furthermore, the study analyzed whether CPAK phenotypes were maintained or altered after medial or lateral UKA.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who underwent UKA. A radiological analysis was conducted using an EOS imaging system, and demographic data of patients undergoing UKA were collected. Performed measurements included the mechanical hip-knee-ankle angle (mHKA), lateral distal femur angle (LDFA), and medial proximal tibia angle (MPTA), which were analyzed both before and after UKA. The CPAK classification was used to classify knee alignment phenotypes.
resultsA total of 310 knees of 244 patients were included in the study that underwent non-robotically assisted, fixed-bearing UKA (279 medial; 31 lateral). Preoperatively, the most common categories for knees were Type I (varus mechanical axis, 53.8%) in medial UKA and Type III (valgus alignment, 77.4%) in lateral UKA. Postoperatively, Type II (neutral mechanical axis) became the most common type for both groups, accounting for 34.1% in the medial UKA group and 25.8% in the lateral UKA group. Only 31.3% preserved their preoperative CPAK classification after the surgery (32.3% and 22.6%, respectively).
conclusionThe CPAK classification differs significantly between knees that underwent medial and lateral UKA. While 31.3% of knees maintained their native knee phenotype, there is a tendency towards a neutrally aligned classification after surgery for both medial and lateral UKA. The CPAK classification optimizes preoperative categorization and may assist surgeons in tailoring personalized therapies to improve clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39729196What 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.