ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2026
Comparing Anterior Versus Posterior Size Referencing in Patients Undergoing Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: One Technique Per Knee.
Article in Indian 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The preferred technique for femoral implant sizing in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is debatable. Sizing is based on the anterior femoral cortex or posterior condylar reference. Using a single knee system, this study compared anterior referencing (AR) versus posterior referencing (PR) in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral TKA, where one reference technique was randomized to each knee. Methods: This prospective study compared the two sizing references using one posterior stabilized knee system. The study included 81 subjects with osteoarthritis and similar varus deformity in both knees. All subjects underwent identical surgical procedures, aside from the selected femoral sizing reference. Subjects were followed for at least 2 years. Results: The two sizing techniques did not significantly differ in all measured radiographic, operative, and clinical parameters. The mean posterior condylar offset ratios were similar. Two-year mean knee flexion and Revised Oxford Knee Scores showed no difference. Eighty-four percent of patients stated no preference for either technique. Conclusion: Knees sized with anterior referencing had similar functional outcomes to those sized with posterior referencing. Using a current knee system with multiple sizing options, there is no discernable difference in all measured study parameters. Either reference is acceptable.
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.