ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Artificial medial and lateral meniscus prostheses mimic kinematics of the native meniscus without affecting knee joint motion: A cadaveric study.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The 'Save the Meniscus' philosophy and the 'Iceberg' concept.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Artificial medial and lateral meniscus prostheses mimic kinematics of the native meniscus without affecting knee joint motion: A cadaveric study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This exploratory study tested the hypothesis that total medial and lateral meniscus prostheses have no adverse effect on range of motion, kinematics and laxity of the knee joint. Furthermore, it was investigated whether the prosthesis kinematics were similar to the native meniscus kinematics during flexion and under knee loading. Methods: A dedicated knee testing rig was used to apply different flexion angles and joint loads to 13 cadaveric knee joints. Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) was used to analyse the kinematics of the knee joint and the meniscus. For both the medial and lateral compartment, linear mixed models were used to make a comparison between the native condition, the meniscectomized knee joint, a meniscal allograft transplant and the meniscus prosthesis. A Lachman test was simulated to measure the effect of the different meniscal conditions on anteroposterior knee laxity, with and without the anterior cruciate ligament intact. Results: None of the meniscal conditions restricted range of motion or adversely affected joint kinematics. During flexion and loading, the medial and lateral meniscus prostheses translated over the tibial plateau in a comparable way as the native meniscus, although some differences were identified. Anteroposterior knee laxity was not significantly altered by any of the meniscal conditions. Conclusions: The artificial medial and lateral meniscus prostheses did not affect knee range of motion. Only minor differences in knee joint and meniscus kinematics were found between the prostheses and the native meniscus, and no effect on joint laxity was found. Level of Evidence: Level V.
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.