Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40891929›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2025

Patellofemoral arthroplasty-patient demographics and revision causes compared with total and medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: long-term follow-up data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

Harald Nagelgaard Omenås, Einar Lindalen, Ove Nord Furnes, Anne Marie Fenstad, Mona Badawy

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Harald Nagelgaard OmenåsCoastal Hospital in Hagevik, Orthopaedic Department, Haukeland University Hospital, Hagavik, Norway. harald.nagelgaard.omenas@helse-bergen.
Einar LindalenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Lovisenberg Deaconal Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Ove Nord FurnesThe Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8223-2515
Anne Marie FenstadThe Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6429-0153
Mona BadawyCoastal Hospital in Hagevik, Orthopaedic Department, Haukeland University Hospital, Hagavik, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6529-1484

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposePatellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is a rare surgical procedure for isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA). This study compares patient demographics, long-term survival rates, revision risks, and causes of revision in PFA with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

methodsData from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) (1994-2022) included 725 PFA, 102,135 TKA, and 14,315 UKA procedures. We used Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis to calculate implant survival at 2, 5, 10, and 15 years and Cox regression adjusted for confounders to assess revision risks. Revision causes were analyzed for procedures after 2005.

resultsPFA patients were more often female (72%) than TKA (62%) and UKA (51%) patients and had a lower mean age (54.3 for PFA, 69.0 for TKA, and 65.6 for UKA). At 10 years, KM survival was 85% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80.6-88.2) for PFA, 94% (CI 93.8-94.2) for TKA, and 84% (CI 83.6-85.1) for UKA. Among patients < 60 years, KM survival at 10 years was 84% (CI 79.4-88.1) for PFA, 90% (CI 89.3-90.4) for TKA, and 79% (CI 77.1-80.3) for UKA. In patients < 60 years with < 10 years' follow-up, the adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for revision were 0.9 for TKA and 1.7 for UKA compared with PFA. Adjusted HR for > 10 years' follow-up showed lower revision risks for TKA with 0.3 and no significant difference for UKA (HR 0.9). Progression of OA was the leading cause of revision in PFA (49%).

conclusionPFA was predominantly performed in younger female patients. In patients < 60 years, PFA showed similar 10-year survival to TKA but inferior survival after 15 years. Revision rates for PFA are comparable to UKA but inferior to TKA.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeOsteoarthritis, KneePatellofemoral JointReoperationAdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee ProsthesisMaleMiddle AgedNorwayProsthesis FailureRegistries

Identifiers

PMID40891929
PMCPMC12404100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.