ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Fewer poor joint awareness results with cementless TKA compared with the same-design cemented implant.
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. 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
backgroundComparisons of cemented and cementless TKA have focused on mean outcomes and generally reported equivalence. We hypothesized that a 3D-printed full-titanium cementless TKA and the same-design cemented implant would not differ significantly in average joint awareness but would differ in the proportion of patients with the poorest results, and we compared the two both at the mean and across the outcome distribution.
methodsProspective two-cohort study of 109 primary unilateral TKAs (54 cementless, 55 cemented) for end-stage knee osteoarthritis, with complete 24-month follow-up. Exclusion criteria were valgus deformity and bilateral surgery. The primary outcome was the FJS-12, analysed both at the mean (multivariable linear regression, with propensity score overlap weighting as sensitivity analysis) and across its distribution (quantile regression). Secondary outcomes were PASS achievement (FJS-12 ≥ 33.3), OKS, and time to functional satisfaction.
resultsThe cementless group was younger (P < 0.001) with more men (P = 0.008). Mean FJS-12 was not different between groups after adjustment (β = 7.4, 95% CI - 1.8 to 16.6, P = 0.115), although the confidence interval did not exclude a difference exceeding the minimal clinically important difference; this finding was reproduced by overlap weighting. On quantile regression, cementless patients scored significantly higher at the 10th and 25th percentiles (adjusted P = 0.028 and 0.021) but not at the median or above. A greater proportion of cementless patients achieved the PASS (96.3% vs. 76.4%; absolute difference 19.9%, 95% CI 7.1 to 32.9; number needed to treat 5), which persisted after adjustment (P = 0.005). No significant differences were observed in OKS (P = 0.91) or time to functional satisfaction (adjusted P = 0.39). No revisions or loosening occurred.
conclusionThe 3D-printed full-titanium cementless TKA did not produce a significantly higher mean FJS-12 than the same-design cemented device at 24 months, but it significantly reduced the proportion of patients with poor joint awareness outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42853330What 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.