Cemented Versus Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty of the Same Modern Design: A Prospective, Randomized Trial

この研究はハイインパクトの可能性があります。 OEのAI駆動型ハイインパクト指標は、論文が掲載されたジャーナルと論文自体の科学的内容の両方からのシグナルを統合することで、論文が持つ可能性の高い影響力を推定します。 最先端の自然言語処理を用いて開発されたOEハイインパクトモデルは、ジャーナルのインパクトファクターのみよりも、研究の将来の引用実績をより正確に予測します。 これにより、臨床的に意義のある研究をより早く認識することが可能になり、読者は将来の診療を形成する可能性が最も高い論文に集中することができます。

147 patients scheduled for a primary total knee arthroplasty for arthritis were randomized to receive the same cruciate-retaining implant with either cemented fixation or cementless, biological fixation. The primary outcome of interest was the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Secondary outcomes of interest included the Knee Society Score (KSS), the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), the percentage of normal knee function, overall health rating, satisfaction with overall function, radiographic outcomes, the incidence of of failure or component subsidence, and the incidence of revision. Follow up was performed at 4-6 weeks, 1 year and 2 years post-operation. Results revealed no significant differences in OKS, KSS, FJS, or the percentage of normal knee function between the two groups at all time points. There were no significant differences in overall health rating or the satisfaction with overall function at 2 years. No cases of failure or component subsidence were reported. 1 case of revision was reported in the cemented group. The mean thicknesses of the clear zones around the tibial and femoral components were significantly larger in the cementless group.