ReviewJournal of orthopaedics2026
Restricted kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty achieves equivalent or superior functional outcomes to mechanical alignment without compromising implant survivorship: A systematic review.
Review in Journal of orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 systematic review assesses the viability of restricted kinematic alignment compared to mechanical alignment by assessing clinical outcomes, radiological findings, and patient-reported outcome measures. Median follow-up was 20.3 months. Both RCTs and observational studies are included in this review. Methods: A search was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines over PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases. The following search string, ('restricted kinematic alignment' AND 'mechanical alignment') AND ('total knee arthroplasty' OR 'total knee replacement') was used. Titles, abstracts and keywords were screened against predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data was extracted by two independent reviewers and conflict was resolved by consensus. Results: A total of 110 papers between 1975 and January 2025 were screened with 11 texts included in the final analysis.Restricted kinematic alignment achieved superior FJS (p = 0.044) and KSS (p = 0.028) at 12 and 24 months respectively compared to mechanical alignment. Radiographic analyses confirmed coronal limb alignment and femoral/tibial component positioning remained within defined safe zones, with no significant increase in outliers. Importantly, complication and revision rates did not differ significantly between groups, indicating no compromise in short-term safety which is defined as follow-up less than five years. Conclusion: This analysis suggests restricted kinematic alignment provides functional advantages whilst adhering to strict 'intraoperative safe zones' with no increase in short-term complications. However, surgical technique remains variable with some studies using robotic assisted surgery and others utilising calipered kinematic adjustments or navigation-assisted resections. Long-term implant durability also remains a crucial unanswered question. 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.