Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40240515›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Implant placement parameters are associated with post operative dynamic varus and valgus knee angle in robotic assisted TKA.

Sean E Higinbotham, Azhar A Ali, Xiangyi Liu, Cheryl A Blackwood, Paul J Rullkoetter, Clint B Blackwood, Kevin B Shelburne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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.

Sean E HiginbothamMechanical and Materials Engineering, Center for Orthopaedic Biomechanics, University of Denver, 2155 East Wesley Ave., Denver, CO, 80210, USA.
Azhar A AliStryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, NJ, USA.
Xiangyi LiuStryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, NJ, USA.
Cheryl A BlackwoodBoulder Centre for Orthopedics & Spine, Boulder, CO, USA.
Paul J RullkoetterMechanical and Materials Engineering, Center for Orthopaedic Biomechanics, University of Denver, 2155 East Wesley Ave., Denver, CO, 80210, USA.
Clint B BlackwoodBoulder Centre for Orthopedics & Spine, Boulder, CO, USA.
Kevin B ShelburneMechanical and Materials Engineering, Center for Orthopaedic Biomechanics, University of Denver, 2155 East Wesley Ave., Denver, CO, 80210, USA. kevin.shelburne@du.edu.

Funding

A Lower Extremity Neuromusculoskeletal Human Simulator: Addressing Multiscale ChallengesU01AR072989 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF DENVER (COLORADO SEMINARY) · PI SHELBURNE, KEVIN B · 2018 to 2021
$1.9M
NIAMS NIH HHS U01 AR072989NIH HHS U01AR072989
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), correcting or maintaining coronal knee alignment is essential for high patient function and satisfaction. However, coronal knee alignment achieved during surgery frequently changes with standing, possibly reflecting the change in knee loading and varus-valgus that occurs between non-weightbearing and weightbearing. Moreover, joint alignment also varies as the knee joint flexes and with dynamic activities. While studies have reported coronal knee alignment achieved intraoperatively during TKA surgery, they rarely trace back to the surgical choices and parameters that may predict longer-term knee alignment. Robotic-assisted TKA enables the delivery of a precise surgical plan including the surgical parameters that achieve the final position of the implants, the final intraoperative knee alignment, and the associated soft tissue balance. The objectives of this study were to determine the relationship between intraoperative alignment and in vivo static and dynamic alignment and varus-valgus during tasks of daily living 1-year after surgery, and to quantify the surgical parameters that predict in vivo static and dynamic varus-valgus during tasks of daily living. Activities requiring minimal flexion, like gait and step down, maintained knee alignment consistent with that achieved intraoperatively. However, as knee flexion angles increased during the lunge, knee extension, and leg press dynamic activities, there was a poor relationship between delivered alignment and varus-valgus angle of the knee. Medial gap in flexion, femoral implant valgus-varus and internal-external rotation alignment, and tibial valgus-varus rotation and slope were the most influential surgical parameters, significantly impacting patient frontal plane knee kinematics. These results may inform preoperative planning by illustrating how varus-valgus alignment is affected by proposed surgical plans and thus help reduce the variability in delivered dynamic varus-valgus, ultimately improving long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee JointRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansKnee ProsthesisMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneeRange of Motion, ArticularAnatomic alignmentFluoroscopyKnee replacementMechanical alignmentSurgical planning

Identifiers

PMID40240515
PMCPMC12003682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.