ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Outcomes Between Cruciate-Retaining and Posterior-Stabilized Prostheses in Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Early Outcomes of Cruciate-Retaining Versus Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty in Younger Patients: A Prospective Eastern European Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
Introduction Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the definitive surgical treatment for advanced gonarthrosis when conservative measures fail. Among the available implant designs, posterior cruciate-retaining (PCR) and posterior-stabilized (PS) prostheses are widely used, yet their comparative performance in long-term functional recovery and health-related quality of life remains under debate. Methods We conducted a prospective observational study involving 48 elderly patients undergoing primary TKA at a tertiary-care center in Mexico. Participants received either PCR (n=27) or PS (n=21) implants based on intraoperative assessment. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) Index, the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-10) Global Health questionnaire at preoperative, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results Both groups demonstrated improvements in all outcome measures; however, PCR patients consistently achieved better results across the follow-up period. At 24 months, WOMAC scores, which reflect better symptom control with higher values, were superior in the PCR group for pain (77.5 vs. 71.0), stiffness (72.5 vs. 62.5), and physical function (86.5 vs. 82.6). SF-36 also favored PCR in physical functioning (66.5 vs. 64.1), bodily pain (72.1 vs. 70.0), and role-physical (54.0 vs. 51.0). PROMIS-10 confirmed these trends, with higher physical (73.9 vs. 71.3) and mental health scores (75.2 vs. 72.0) among PCR patients at 24 months. Conclusions Patients receiving cruciate-retaining prostheses experienced greater and more sustained improvements in pain relief, joint function, and quality of life compared to those with posterior-stabilized implants. These findings support the functional advantage of PCR designs in elderly patients undergoing TKA and highlight the value of long-term, multidimensional outcome assessment using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
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.