ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2026
When the Tibia Hurts: Pain and Revision After Extendable Distal Femoral Endoprostheses in Young Patients.
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
Objective: En-bloc excision with limb salvage is the gold standard for aggressive bone tumors around the knee, but up to 15% of cases occur in skeletally immature patients, creating a risk of limb-length discrepancy. Growing distal femoral prostheses with passive sliding tibial components address this issue but introduce unique mechanical challenges and potential complications. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of tibial pain and complications beneath extendable distal femoral endoprostheses, and to correlate clinical symptoms and revision surgery. Methods: The study comprised a retrospective review of 31 extendible distal femur endoprostheses from a single tertiary institution between 2008 and 2018. Measurements of radiographic parameters included coronal alignment, cortical thickness, cortical stem distances, stress shielding, and pedestal and periosteal reaction. The radiographic features were correlated with clinical evidence of tibial pain and the need for subsequent revision of the tibial component. Results: 17 patients reported tibial pain during the follow-up period, with a mean time of onset of 62.2 months (range, 27-132). There were 14 revisions in 12 patients, 4 revisions for tibial pain. Stress shielding and pedestal formation were seen in all patients after 28 months following insertion. Lateral cortical hypertrophy was more prominent in the group with pain with a mean thickness of 5.8 mm (range, 4-9.8). Varus shift of the tibial stem was radiographically evident during follow-up ( Conclusion: There is a strong correlation between radiographic evidence of tibial stem migration and periosteal reaction and the development of symptoms. Patients should be warned of the need for revision of the tibial component for pain during the lifetime of the implant. Level of evidence: IV.
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.