ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2025
Clinical outcomes of a 'patella-friendly' medial pivot total knee arthroplasty with and without patella resurfacing: A prospective randomised study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advances in knee implant design brings new focus on the benefit of patella resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The "patella-friendly" medial pivot SAIPH™ knee was designed to provide a more optimal patella articular environment, potentially reducing the requirement for patella resurfacing. This study examined anterior knee pain and related clinical outcomes when patella resurfacing (PR) was randomised against retention of the native knee. Methods: In a prospective study, fifty-one patients having a primary TKA were randomised to PR or non-RP prior to surgery. All patients received the same 'patella-friendly' implant using a standardized surgical technique. Patient demographics were recorded prior to surgery and intra-operative assessment of patella surface degeneration was conducted for all patients. Outcomes were evaluated at 4 weeks and one year. The primary outcome was the Kujala Anterior Knee Pain Score (KS), and secondary outcomes were the Patient Knee Implant Performance Score (PKIP), Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS). Complications requiring surgical management or mobility restriction treated with manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) were recorded over the duration of the study. Results: There was no significant difference between groups in baseline age (p = 0.67) or BMI (p = 0.97). Between-group differences in KS were not significant at 4 weeks (PR 55.3 Non-PR 53.6, p = 0.67) and 12 months (PR 78.4 Non-PR 77.6, p = 0.86). No significant between group differences were identified for the PKIP, OKS or FJS at both follow-up time points. The proportion of satisfied patients was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.14). No patients required revision surgery. Three patients in the non-PR group and one patient in the PR group required MUA (p = 0.32). Conclusion: Patella resurfacing demonstrated no superiority compared to non-resurfacing in relation to clinical outcomes and post-operative complications when using a 'patella-friendly' implant.
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.