ArticleOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
[Update 2025: Biomechanics and kinematics after total knee arthroplasty (TKA)].
Article in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn order to optimise clinical outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), research has refocused on the knee joint's biomechanical characteristics. Beyond implant design and alignment philosophy, the restoration of natural joint kinematics, functional range of motion, and stability critically depends on patient-specific anatomical conditions. BIOMECHANICS: Instrumented TKA systems have demonstrated the significance of coronal alignment and mediolateral load distribution. Furthermore, patellofemoral joint alignment has gained attention as a determinant of postoperative success. While static radiographic assessments remain the gold standard, they can be meaningfully complemented by instrumented gait analysis to capture dynamic leg alignment and quantify the influence of the external knee adduction moment. Furthermore, computational simulations facilitate a more precise analysis of implant-specific loading conditions and kinematic behaviour. NEW
methodsIn combination with experimental approaches, such as in vitro kinematic testing, these tools facilitate a detailed evaluation of complex movement and load scenarios, thereby supporting the development of personalised therapeutic and rehabilitative strategies. Furthermore, the development of novel classifications of kinematic phenotypes holds great potential for the systematic categorisation of patients and the personalisation of interventions, with the aim of enhancing functional outcomes and satisfaction. The use of subject-specific musculoskeletal models and finite element analysis (FEA) permits the simulation of joint mechanics under individual anatomical constraints, thus contributing to the optimisation of implant positioning and the reduction of biomechanical load. In the future, the integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning into preoperative planning is expected to refine patient-specific treatment algorithms. PROSPECT: The clinical translation of these biomechanical insights will ultimately require validation in larger patient cohorts in order to substantiate their efficacy and long-term benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40694122What 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.