ArticleArthroplasty today2025
A Comparison of Isolated Tibial Insert Exchanges for Global Instability to Full Revisions for Flexion Instability in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 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.
- Article
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: Instability remains a leading cause of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, whether a full component revision (FCR) or an isolated tibial insert exchange (ITIE) is indicated remains complicated with conflicting evidence. This study compared the outcomes of patients undergoing ITIE vs FCR for instability. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on 172 consecutive revision TKAs for global or isolated flexion instability. Diagnosis of symmetric global instability vs isolated flexion instability was based on pre-revision examination in the clinic and confirmed by rigorous numerical flexion and extension gap measurements intraoperatively. Patient-reported outcome measures and associated clinically relevant thresholds were evaluated using a significance level of 0.05. Results: There were 144 patients who underwent FCR for flexion instability, while 28 underwent ITIE for global instability. While not statistically significant, a greater percentage of FCR patients met the minimal clinically important difference threshold for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (69 vs 38%; Conclusions: Study results demonstrate that ITIE can be successful after revision TKA given the specific indication of symmetric global instability with well-fixed and well-positioned components. However, FCR is preferred in the case of flexion instability and the surgeon must be vigilant in their specific instability etiology within each patient. Level of Evidence: III.
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.