ArticleThe archives of bone and joint surgery2025
Cemented Versus Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty: Analysis of the Latest Literature Data.
Article in The archives of bone and joint surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Thirty-year outcomes of cemented versus cementless posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of cementless total knee arthorplasty (TKA) has increased in recent years to the detriment of the use of cemented TKA. However, there is still no agreement on when to cement and in whom. A recent meta-analysis has shown that the cumulative survival at 12 years was 97% for the cementless implants and 89% for the cemented implants. Besides, no differences between the cemented and cementless TKAs were found in patient-reported results and revision rates. Another study showed noninferiority to cemented TKA. Its authors stated that cementles TKA can be utilized as an alternative mode of fixation in individuals opting for primary TKA. However, it was mentioned that additional long-run follow-up was required to confirm if cementless TKA can exhibit improved survivorship over cemented TKA. In individuals > 70 years of age, cementless TKA accomplished clinical scores equivalent to those of younger individuals at 2-year follow-up. Cementless TKA seemed to be a safe alternative for older individuals. Another meta-analysis has shown a substantial reduction in all-cause revisions and revisions for aseptic loosening when utilizing cementless fixation in high body mass index individuals when compared to the usage of cemented implants. In conclusion, clinical practice guidelines are required to ensure safe and efficacious usage of cementless fixation.
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.