Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39949203›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2025

Improved quadriceps efficiency with a medial pivot in comparison to a cruciate-retaining design in total knee arthroplasty.

Leandra Bauer, Thomas R Niethammer, Christoph Thorwächter, Matthias Woiczinski, Peter E Müller, Florian Simon, Boris M Holzapfel, Johanna-Maria Simon

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Improved quadriceps efficiency with a medial pivot in comparison to a cruciate-retaining design in total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Leandra BauerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Thomas R NiethammerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Christoph ThorwächterDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Matthias WoiczinskiDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Peter E MüllerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Florian SimonDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Boris M HolzapfelDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Johanna-Maria SimonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich (MUM), University Hospital Munich, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8289-6642

Funding

Förderprogramm für Forschung und Lehre 1085
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) design offers rotational freedom but risks abnormal kinematics and instability. The medial pivot (MP) design mimics native joint motion with a high-conformity medial and flat lateral interface. Within clinical studies, the MP design outclassed the CR design, but biomechanical studies are lacking. This study investigates the tibiofemoral and patellofemoral kinematics of both implant designs compared to native kinematics.

methodsEight fresh-frozen cadaveric knee specimens underwent total knee arthroplasty using MP and CR designs. Testing was performed in a dynamic knee rig simulating active knee flexion (30-130°) under muscle load. Biomechanical assessments included tibial rotation, tibiofemoral translation, patellar tilt/shift, patellofemoral contact/pressure patterns and quadriceps force. Functional regressions were used to analyse the effects of the component designs on the native situation.

resultsThe MP design exhibited increased tibial rotation (130° flexion: MP 9.4° vs. CR 6.6°) and lateral anterior tibial translation during flexion (130° flexion: MP 25.8 mm vs. CR 22.6 mm). Both designs showed no significant differences in patellar tilt or shift and similar patellofemoral pressure (CR 3.2 MPa, MP 3.4 MPa) and contact patterns (CR 213.8 mm

conclusionThe MP design provides a more native-like knee kinematic profile than the CR design, with a more pronounced MP motion pattern and reduced quadriceps loading. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Not applicable.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee JointKnee ProsthesisProsthesis DesignQuadriceps MuscleAgedAged, 80 and overBiomechanical PhenomenaCadaverFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRange of Motion, Articularcruciate retainingknee rigmedial pivotmedial stabilizedtotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID39949203
PMCPMC12205411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.