ReviewInternational orthopaedics2026
Reluctant knee: understanding and managing stiffness after total knee arthroplasty.
Review in International 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePost-total knee arthroplasty (TKA) stiffness remains a clinically important cause of pain, restricted range of motion (ROM), functional limitation, and reintervention. This narrative review synthesises current evidence on the pathophysiology, evaluation, and staged management of post-TKA stiffness, with particular emphasis on manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA).
methodsA narrative review was performed using literature relating to post-TKA stiffness, arthrofibrosis, diagnostic evaluation, rehabilitation, MUA, lysis of adhesions, and revision TKA. Evidence was synthesised thematically to support a practical diagnostic and management framework.
resultsAcquired idiopathic stiffness occurs in approximately 3.6% to 4.0% of TKAs, while MUA is required in roughly 2.6% to 3.6% of cases. The available literature supports a diagnosis-of-exclusion approach, in which infection, component malposition, instability, and other secondary causes are excluded before arthrofibrosis is diagnosed. MUA remains the principal first-line procedural intervention once early conservative measures fail. Earlier MUA, generally within 6-12 weeks, is associated with greater ROM gain than delayed intervention, although outcomes remain influenced by baseline ROM severity, patient selection, and the quality of post-manipulation rehabilitation.
conclusionPost-TKA stiffness is a heterogeneous complication requiring structured evaluation and staged management. When MUA fails, escalation to arthrolysis or revision TKA should be individualised and guided by the distinction between persistent soft-tissue fibrosis and correctable mechanical pathology. A practical algorithm is proposed to support diagnosis, timing of intervention, and escalation after failed MUA.
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.