MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414126627 · doi:10.1002/ksa.70033

The effects of over‐ and under‐stuffing the anterior knee compartment in primary TKA: A systematic review

2025· review· en· W4414126627 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christos Koutserimpas, Vasileios Giovanoulis, Mo Saffarini, M. Bonnin, Michael T. Hirschmann, Sébastien Lustıg

Bibliographic record

VenueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompartment (ship)Orthopedic surgeryCompartment SyndromesFasciotomyKnee JointOrthopedic ProceduresOsteoarthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Up to 20% of patients remain dissatisfied following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), often due to anterior knee pain (AKP) and other patellofemoral complications. Several studies highlighted risks of over- or under-stuffing within the patellofemoral compartment, yet there are no standardised methods for their assessment, and their effects on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) remain unclear. The aim of this review was to synthesise and critically appraise all published studies that investigated effects of over- and under-stuffing the anterior compartment on PROMs following primary TKA. METHODS: The protocol for this systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines was registered on PROSPERO (July 2024), before electronic searches by two readers (C.K. and V.G.) using Medline and Scopus. The authors included clinical studies published in English, reporting a quantifiable method to assess the anterior compartment in TKA, with clinical and/or radiographic outcomes. The authors excluded in vitro or ex vivo studies, reviews or editorials, studies on revision TKA and studies with follow-up <1 year. RESULTS: Searches returned 160 records, of which 14 met the eligibility criteria (10 retrospective and 4 prospective), representing 4404 knees in 3718 patients. The primary outcome was over-stuffing in five studies, which investigated its correlation with PROMs and/or AKP, while the primary outcome was under-stuffing in two studies. The PROMs reported were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (eight studies), knee society score (six studies), knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (two studies), as well as Oxford knee score, forgotten joint score and Kujala scores (each one study). Only two studies used dynamic assessments, while 12 used static assessments. Only 3 of the 14 studies found significant effects of over-stuffing (by >5 mm) on PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in anterior offset, particularly over-stuffing, may cause patellofemoral complications. Although it would be ideal to restore the anterior compartment, small deviations do not affect clinical outcomes. A threshold of 5 mm could represent the 'safe zone' for change in anterior offset in patients undergoing TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.008
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology ArthroscopySame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207