Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40133714›Full record

SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025

Mechanical versus kinematic alignment for total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Filippo Migliorini, Nicola Maffulli, Marco Pilone, Luise Schäfer, David Ullmann, Thorsten Huber, Björn Rath

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. In Vitro Wear Simulation of a Kinematically Aligned Knee Implant Tilted at an Angle of 8°.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Learning curve for robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

7 authors.

Filippo MiglioriniDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Academic Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), 39100, Bolzano, Italy. migliorini.md@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7220-1221
Nicola MaffulliDepartment of Medicine and Psychology, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy.
Marco PiloneResidency Program in Orthopedics and Traumatology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Luise SchäferDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Academic Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), 39100, Bolzano, Italy.
David UllmannDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600, Wels, Austria.
Thorsten HuberDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600, Wels, Austria.
Björn RathDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600, Wels, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe present meta-analysis compared mechanical versus kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), and revision rate.

methodsThis study was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. In July 2024, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed without time constraints. All the clinical studies that compared mechanical versus kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty were accessed.

results30 studies (3133 TKAs) were collected. The mean duration of the follow-up was 30.8 ± 38 months. No difference was found in Knee KSS-F, Knee Society Score (KSS, P = 0.2) and its function subscale (P = 0.3), visual analogue scale (VAS, P = 0.3), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC, P = 0.2), Oxford Knee Score (OKS, P = 0.5). No difference was found in the rate of revision (P = 0.4). The ROM was slightly greater in the kinematic group (P < 0.0001).

conclusionPROMs and revision did not show a difference between mechanical and kinematic alignment in TKA. However, a minimal difference in the ROM was evidenced, which probably does not have clinical relevance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisOsteoarthritis, KneeBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansKnee JointPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRange of Motion, ArticularReoperationAlignmentBiomechanical phenomenaKnee prosthesisTKATotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.