ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025
Bone defects in knee revision arthroplasty-a therapy-oriented classification.
Article 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. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe complex field of revision knee arthroplasty displays a lack of standardized, intuitive pre- and intraoperative assessment of bone defects. In clinical practice revision surgeries are a common sight presenting with increasingly complex cases of bone loss and ligamentary dysfunction. To address these issues the Knee Defect Classification (KDC) is introduced to offer a reliable, reproducible and an intuitive classification system with a clear therapeutic guideline. MATERIALS AND
methodsReliability was evaluated through comparison between intraoperative findings and preoperative gradings of 218 patients. To account for reproducibility inter- and intra-rater agreement was assessed.
resultsThe mean agreement between intraoperative and radiographic grading of femoral and tibial defects was evaluated with a Cohens kappa of 0.79, representing a good agreement. For interrater reliability a mean Fleiss kappa of 0.71 could be evaluated for femoral and tibial defects falling into the good agreement range. In the subgroup analysis femoral defects presented with a Fleiss kappa of 0.652 ± 0.026 (good agreement), while tibial defects presented with a Fleiss kappa of 0.768 ± 0.024 (good agreement). For intrarater reliability a mean Cohens kappa was evaluated at 0.78 indicating good agreement.
conclusionThe KDC is a reliable and reproducible classification system. Through its structured design it facilitates intuitive use and allows for consistent preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance. A therapeutic algorithm is provided based on a review of the literature in combination with expert opinion.
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.