Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41560963›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026

Limb salvage in multiple revision total knee arthroplasty using customised implants: When sleeves and cones are no longer an option.

Stefanie Donner, Clemens Gwinner, Henryk Haffer, Carsten Perka, Stephanie Kirschbaum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Stefanie DonnerCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery (CMSC) Berlin Germany.
Clemens GwinnerCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery (CMSC) Berlin Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7489-245X
Henryk HafferCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery (CMSC) Berlin Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5614-5431
Carsten PerkaCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery (CMSC) Berlin Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0993-581X
Stephanie KirschbaumCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery (CMSC) Berlin Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8263-4354

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Multiple revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) remains highly challenging due to severe bone defects, which often render standard implants unsuitable. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes, survivorship and complication rates of customised knee implants used in aseptic one-stage rTKA for patients with severe bone defects. Methods: This study included 16 patients who underwent 18 one-stage rTKAs using custom-made implants due to aseptic loosening between 2016 and 2023. Conventional revision systems failed to provide appropriate femoral or tibial fixation due to severe conical longitudinal bone defects classified as Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) type III. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), Oxford knee score (OKS), visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, range of motion (ROM), walking time and procedure-related complications. Implant costs were compared between customised and standard implants. Results: Mean follow-up was 51 months (range, 24-100), with patients having an average of five previous surgeries (range, 2-8). During follow-up, three patients (17%) reported complications: one periprosthetic fracture, one periprosthetic joint infection and one failure of the modular stem component. Mean KOOS improved from 31 to 80 ( Conclusions: Customised implants for one-stage rTKA present a promising cementless fit-and-fill fixation option for patients with severe longitudinal bone defects, particularly when standard knee revision implants, including cones and sleeves, are no longer suitable. Yet, these results are just midterm and small sample size-based and therefore long-term results in larger patient numbers need to be awaited before a final conclusion can be made. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Indexed as

bone defectcustomisedlimb salvagerevision total knee arthroplastystem fixation

Identifiers

PMID41560963
PMCPMC12814209

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.