ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2025
The influence of CPAK classification on the pivot motion between kinematic and mechanical alignment total knee arthroplasty.
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.
- Coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) phenotypes and their relationship with gap patterns in robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a clinical trial.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study investigated whether the preoperative coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK), categorized as type I or II, has an effect on postoperative tibial internal rotation (TIR) relative to the femur in patients who received a medial pivot-cruciate retaining (MP-CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 62 patients who underwent MP-CR TKA with the GMK Sphere implant (Medacta International, Switzerland) from January 2024 to May 2025. Based on their CPAK classification, patients were divided into two groups (type I or II). Intraoperative kinematic assessments were performed using augmented reality (AR) CT-guided navigation (NextAR, Medacta), evaluating the dynamic elongation of medial and lateral collateral ligaments during either kinematic (KA) or mechanical alignment (MA) procedures. The primary measure was TIR at 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120° of knee flexion.Univariate analyses identified significant differences, which were further assessed using multi-way ANOVA to determine interactions with CPAK classification. Results: Notable differences in TIR were found between CPAK types I and II at 60° (2.1° ± 4.8° vs. -2.0° ± 4.2°, p = 0.009), 90° (7.0° ± 4.3° vs. 2.1° ± 5.6°, p = 0.002), and 120° (13.1° ± 5.2° vs. 7.5° ± 4.9°, p = 0.002). Additionally, at 90°, sex and alignment method (KA vs. MA) showed significant interaction with CPAK classification (F = 6.4; p = 0.015), while the alignment method alone had no significant effect on TIR. Conclusion: The CPAK classification prior to surgery affected TIR outcomes regardless of the alignment method used, as measured via AR-CT navigation.
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.