SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Tibial stem extension versus standard configuration in primary cemented total knee arthroplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective insights into tibial stems, cemented versus uncemented in primary total knee arthroplasty: A dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Trial
- The Effect of the Coronal Alignment of Extension Stem on Component Displacement and Stress During Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Finite Element Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Mesh Reconstruction of Extensor Mechanism for Fracture Nonunion of the Patella in an Osteoarthritic Knee.Arthroplasty today · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn order to increase the stability of tibial component in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), intramedullary stem extensions (SE) have been developed. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to address the critical knowledge gap on post-operative outcomes and complications rate comparison between tibial component with SE compared to the tibial component standard configuration (SC) in primary cemented TKA.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of online databases, including Pubmed, Embase, ISI Web of science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, using the following MeSH terms, (total knee arthroplasty) OR (TKA) OR (total knee replacement) AND (Tibial stem) OR (stem extension) OR (long stem). We included clinical studies that compared the tibial SE with no tibial stem (standard configuration) in primary cemented TKA. The important exclusion criteria were studies on revision (secondary) TKA, un-cemented arthroplasty, high level constrained implants, TKA with tibial augment & tibial bone graft, TKA with femoral stems, studies on short tibial keel (shorter than SC), without any tibial keel, studies with less than 12 months of follow-up. Knee Society Score (KSS) functional and clinical scores were considered as clinical outcomes along with tibial loosening and implant survival rate. The retrieved studies were assessed for methodological quality using Cochrane Collaborations tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials (ROB) and Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools. Weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using random-effects meta-analysis taking into account for heterogeneity.
resultsA total of 223,743 patients (223,766 knees) from 15 articles were included. The risk of tibial aseptic loosening is 54% lower on average in SE group in comparison with SC group (RR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.74), which is more notable among obese class I patients (RR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.78), but not significantly different among obese class II patients (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.19 to 1.78). KSS functional and clinical score increased 3.85 score (95% CI: 1.52 to 6.18), and 1,24 scores (95% CI: - 0.22 to 2.70) among patients in SE group, respectively. The survival rate was 1.04 times greater in the SE group. There was no notable difference in terms of knee deformity (hip-knee-ankle angle) correction, all cause secondary procedure, and complications rate between the two groups.
conclusionThe meta-analysis of post-operative functional scores and tibial loosening rate indicates a preference for tibial SE over the SC in primary cemented TKA. Some studies were rated as having a fair to critical risk of bias during the quality assessment. To strengthen the evidence and improve the applicability of our findings in clinical practice, future high-quality studies are required.
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.