ArticleActa orthopaedica2025
Incidence of constrained condylar and hinged knee implants and mid- to long-term survivorship: a register-based study from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA).
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acute or Delayed TKA for Tibial Plateau Fracture? An Observational Study From the Swedish Arthroplasty Register.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2026Observational
- Impact of osteoarthritis aetiology and implant constraint on the risk of secondary patellar resurfacing after total knee arthroplasty: An analysis of German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) data.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of standard primary vs. primary rotating hinge total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective matched-pair analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Pooling data for primary total knee implants across national registries: is the same implant used in multiple registries and for the same patient group? An observational study.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeIn complex primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), constrained condylar knee (CCK) or rotating hinge knee (RHK) designs may be required to provide stability or address bony deficiencies. We analyzed trends in incidence of these designs in primary TKA and evaluated the mid- to long-term survivorship of CCK and RHK in 4 Nordic countries.
methodsFrom 2000 to 2017, 5,134 CCK and 2,515 RHK primary TKAs were identified from the NARA database. Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival and flexible parametric survival model (FPSM) analyses were performed to estimate revision risk, expressed as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), with minimally stabilized (MS) TKA acting as the control group (n = 456,137).
resultsThe incidence of CCK and RHK implants increased significantly in Finland, while it was moderate in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. With revision for any reason as the endpoint the 15-year K-M cumulative revision risk for RHK was 13.6% (CI 10.4-16.7) and for CCK it was 11.3% (CI 9.1-13.5). Compared with MS TKA, the hazard ratio for revision was 2.1 (CI 1.8-2.3) for CCK and 2.5 (CI 2.1-2.8) for RHK. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) was the most common reason for revision, accounting for 44% of CCK and 47% of RHK cases. After excluding revisions for PJI, the hazard ratio remained high for both designs, at 1.5 (CI 1.3-1.7) for CCK and 1.6 (CI 1.3-2.0) for RHK compared with MS.
conclusionThe incidence of CCK and RHK increased during the study period. Both designs showed consistent 15-year revision risks of 11-14%, with no major differences between them. The higher revision risk compared with MS TKAs may reflect the complexity of the surgeries.
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.