To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Potentially lower migration with all-poly vs metal-backed tibia component in total knee arthroplasty

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
February 2019

Potentially lower migration with all-poly vs metal-backed tibia component in total knee arthroplasty

Vol: 8| Issue: 2| Number:125| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Randomized Trial
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Migration of all-polyethylene compared with metal-backed tibial components in cemented total knee arthroplasty

Acta Orthop. 2018 Aug;89(4):412-417. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1464317

Contributing Authors:
S Toksvig-Larsen RGHH Nelissen KT van Hamersveld PJ Marang-van de Mheen

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

60 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty were randomized to either an all-polyethylene tibial component or metal-backed tibial component. Primary outcome was maximum total point motion of the tibial component over 2-year follow-up, while clinical scores and incidence of adverse events were secondary outcomes. Two-year maximum total point motion of the tibial component was significantly lo...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue