No difference in implant survivorship and clinical outcomes between full-cementless and full-cemented fixation in primary total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The debate over the use of cemented or cementless fixation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has never stopped since cementless fixation was introduced. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the optimal mode of fixation (full-cementless vs. full-cemented) in TKA. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases up to July 2017 were searched to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing full-cementless TKA and full-cemented TKA. The primary outcome was implant survivorship. Secondary outcomes included radiological outcomes (maximum total point-motion [MTPM], radiolucent line, rotation degree) and clinical outcomes (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC] score, Knee Society Score [KSS] score, postoperative range of movement, blood loss and complications). Seven studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The mean follow-up was 7.1 years (range from 2 to 16.6 years). There was no difference in implant survivorship (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95–1.01; p = 0.25; I2 = 0%), MTPM (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.13 mm; 95% CI, −0.69–0.95; p = 0.75; I2 = 89.3%) and radiolucent line (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.57–3.23; p = 0.48; I2 = 54%) between the cementless and cemented methods. There was a mean 0.22° more rotation in the full-cementless fixation group (95% CI, 0.13–0.32; p < 0.01; I2 = 28.5%). There were no significant differences relating to clinical outcomes (WOMAC score, KSS score, postoperative range of movement, blood loss and complications) between the two fixation groups. Although more overall component rotation is found in full-cementless fixation, the implant survivorship and clinical efficacy are likely similar between full-cementless and full-cemented fixation. However, future RCTs with similar cementless prosthetic coating and longer-term follow-up are still needed to confirm our findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.046 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".