ArticleCureus2025
Smart Implantable Device-Enabled Remote Monitoring Reduces Rates of Manipulation Under Anesthesia Following 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.
- Advances in Remote Monitoring Technology Applications in Anesthesia: A Narrative Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Review
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 Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a highly successful procedure; however, postoperative joint stiffness remains a common complication, occasionally requiring manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). This retrospective study aimed to compare MUA incidence between patients who received smart implantable devices (SIDs) and those with traditional components following TKA. We hypothesized that the use of SIDs through remote monitoring would result in decreased MUA incidence when compared to traditional knee implants. Methods This study included 806 patients who underwent primary TKA by a high-volume surgeon between July 2023 and December 2024. Of these patients, 500 received traditional implants, while 306 received SIDs. A power analysis was performed to determine the required sample size. The analysis indicated that a minimum of 431 patients would be required per group. Patients were followed for at least 90 days postoperatively, and MUA incidence was recorded. The demographic data and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) measures were analyzed. Results The incidence of MUA was 3.101% for traditional implant recipients and 0.971% for SID recipients (p<0.05). Traditional implant recipients were over three times more likely to require MUA. Conclusion The use of SIDs in this study demonstrated a significant reduction in MUA incidence following TKA. SID implantation with remote monitoring led to a threefold decrease in the rate of MUA. This study highlights the potential of SIDs to significantly reduce the rate of MUA through remote monitoring of several gait metrics, such as functional range of motion, cadence, and step count, supporting their integration into TKA care protocols.
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.