ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2025
Comparing early functional outcomes between the midvastus and medial parapatellar approach for total knee arthroplasty: A prospective cohort study in an Asian population.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The medial parapatellar approach is the most prevalent approach for total knee arthroplasty. However, recent studies have suggested that the midvastus approach may confer benefits of better functional outcomes in the early post-operative period. This study aims to explore the differences in early functional outcomes between the two approaches. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study of 72 total knee arthroplasties performed in a single tertiary institution. Baseline demographics and functional status were collected. Patients were followed up at the following time points - post-operative day 0, 1, 2, day of discharge and at first follow up 4-6 weeks post-surgery. The primary outcomes were range of motion, ambulatory distance, use of mobility aids, ability to straight leg raise and quadriceps strength - adjuncts to approximate functional recovery. Secondary outcomes include pain scores, operative time, length of stay, presence of any peri-operative complications, and patient discharge destination. Results: Patients in the midvastus group achieved a greater ambulatory distance on post-operative day 1 compared to those in the medial parapatellar group (median ambulation distance 30m versus 18m, p < 0.001). The time to straight leg raise was also shorter in the midvastus group (median duration 0 days vs 1 day, p = 0.016). There was no significant difference in length of stay, operative time or incidence of peri-operative complications. Conclusion: The midvastus approach showed non inferior outcomes when compared to the classic medial parapatellar approach and may confer additional functional benefits in the form of shorter time to straight leg raise and longer ambulatory distances on post-operative day 1. Clinicians need to balance the purported benefits of the midvastus approach with the intraoperative technicalities of the midvastus approach, before deciding if it is suitable to be a standard approach to the knee in total knee arthroplasties.
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.