↓ Skip to main content

Extramedullary versus intramedullary femoral alignment technique in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
Extramedullary versus intramedullary femoral alignment technique in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13018-017-0582-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qian Tang, Ping Shang, Gang Zheng, Hua-Zi Xu, Hai-Xiao Liu

Abstract

There is no consensus whether the use of the extramedullary femoral cutting guide takes advantage over the intramedullary one in total knee arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to compare the extramedullary femoral alignment guide system with the conventional intramedullary alignment guide system for lower limb alignment, blood loss, and operative time during total knee arthroplasty. The Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang Chinese Periodical, Google, and reference lists of all the included studies were searched for randomized controlled trials. The following parameters were compared between the extramedullary technique and the intramedullary technique: (1) lower limb coronal alignment, (2) coronal alignment of femoral component, (3) sagittal alignment of femoral component, (4) blood loss, (5) and operation time. Four randomized controlled trials consisting of 358 knees were included in our study. There was no significant difference between the extramedullary and intramedullary groups for the lower limb coronal alignment (RR = 1.20, 95%CI 0.28~5.21, n.s.), coronal alignment of femoral component (RR = 0.65, 95%CI 0.19~2.22, n.s.), and sagittal alignment of femoral component (RR = 0.73, 95%CI 0.38~1.41, n.s.). A reduced blood loss was associated with the use of the extramedullary guide (MD = -120.34, 95%CI -210.08~-30.59, P = 0.009). No significant difference in operation time was noted between the two groups (MD = 1.41, 95%CI -1.82~4.64, n.s.). Neither extramedullary nor intramedullary femoral alignment is more accurate than the other in facilitating the femoral cut in total knee arthroplasty. Use of the extramedullary guide results in less blood loss and exhibits a similar operation time as compared with the intramedullary guide.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Other 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Master 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 15 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 34%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 17 59%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,350,775
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#512
of 1,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,071
of 317,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#13
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,397 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.