ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Different sagittal cutting plane orientations do not affect posterior tibial slope in open wedge high tibial osteotomy: a Sawbone model study.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeControl of the posterior tibial slope (PTS) is crucial in high tibial osteotomy (HTO), since unintended changes can alter the normal knee kinematics and ligament loading. This study investigated the influence of sagittal cutting plane orientations on PTS in bi-planar medial open wedge HTO (MOWHTO) on a Sawbone model.
methodsSixty Sawbone® left-tibia models (A Pacific Research Company, USA) were used to perform biplanar MOWHTO with three sagittal orientations: (1) parallel to the medial tibial plateau (PO); (2) 10° anterior-inclined osteotomy (AIO); (3) 10° posterior-inclined osteotomy (PIO). The biplanar cut was performed distal to the tibial tuberosity in half the specimens and proximal in the remainder. Customized 3D-printed cutting guides ensured reproducibility. PTS and valgus correction were measured pre- and post-osteotomy using a navigation system. Group- and subgroup-specific ΔPTS were analyzed using a Bayesian multilevel model. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was set at 2.5°. Bayesian “power” analysis (assurance) was used to assess the sensitivity of ΔPTS and pairwise differences relative to the MCID.
resultsAcross the three sagittal orientation and their distal/proximal subgroups, ΔPTS and pairwise ΔPTS did not exceed the predefined MCID of 2.5°. Bayesian assurance of equivalence exceeded 86% in every unit and pairwise comparison, indicating a high confidence that the evaluated HTO configurations are clinically equivalent with respect to ΔPTS.
conclusionIn this experimental study, different sagittal osteotomy inclinations in MOWHTO showed no clinically relevant changes in posterior tibial slope. No significant differences were observed across sagittal cut orientations or ATT levels. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: In vitro biomechanical study.
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.