ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Efficacy of isolated femoral revision in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty instability: A comparative 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 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.
- Efficacy of isolated femoral revision in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty instability: A comparative 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study compares clinical outcomes, implant survival rates and perioperative factors between isolated femoral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision (prTKA) and full TKA revision (frTKA) for flexion instability in cruciate-retaining (CR) prostheses. Methods: This retrospective, controlled case series included 66 consecutive patients treated with either full TKA revision ( Results: No significant differences were found in the clinical outcomes between the prTKA and frTKA groups across various PROMs. Implant survival rates were comparable (96.9% for prTKA vs. 97.1% for frTKA). Compared to frTKA, prTKA resulted in significantly shorter hospital stays ( Conclusions: Partial femoral TKA revision for flexion instability in cruciate-retaining prostheses yielded clinical outcomes and implant survival rates comparable to full TKA revision in the short- to mid-term follow-up. These findings suggest that partial femoral revision may be a viable option for carefully selected patients with flexion instability, offering similar clinical efficacy and potential perioperative advantages over complete revision. Level of Evidence: Level 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.