↓ Skip to main content

A matched‐pair comparison of inlay and onlay trochlear designs for patellofemoral arthroplasty: no differences in clinical outcome but less progression of osteoarthritis with inlay designs

Overview of attention for article published in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
A matched‐pair comparison of inlay and onlay trochlear designs for patellofemoral arthroplasty: no differences in clinical outcome but less progression of osteoarthritis with inlay designs
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00167-015-3733-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthias J. Feucht, Matthias Cotic, Knut Beitzel, Julia F. Baldini, Gebhart Meidinger, Philip B. Schöttle, Andreas B. Imhoff

Abstract

To compare clinical and radiographic results after isolated patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) using either a second-generation inlay or onlay trochlear design. The hypothesis was that an inlay design will produce better clinical results and less progression of tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (OA) compared to an onlay design. Fifteen consecutive patients undergoing isolated PFA with an onlay design trochlear component (Journey™ PFJ, Smith & Nephew) were matched with 15 patients after isolated PFA with an inlay design trochlear component (HemiCAP(®) Wave, Arthrosurface). Matching criteria were age, gender, body mass index, and follow-up period. An independent observer evaluated patients prospectively, whereas data were compared retrospectively. Clinical outcome was assessed using WOMAC, Lysholm score, and pain VAS. Kellgren-Lawrence grading was used to assess progression of tibiofemoral OA. Conversion to total knee arthroplasty was necessary in one patient within each group, leaving 14 patients per group for final evaluation. The mean follow-up was 26 months in the inlay group and 25 months in the onlay group (n.s.). Both groups displayed significant improvements of all clinical scores (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to the clinical outcome and reoperation rate. No significant progression of tibiofemoral OA was observed in the inlay group, whereas 53 % of the onlay group showed progression of medial and/or lateral tibiofemoral OA (p = 0.009). Isolated PFA using either a second-generation inlay or onlay trochlear component significantly improves functional outcome scores and pain. The theoretical advantages of an inlay design did not result in better clinical outcome scores; however, progression of tibiofemoral OA was significantly less common in patients with an inlay trochlear component. This implant design may therefore improve long-term results and survival rates after isolated PFA. III.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 1%
Unknown 73 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Postgraduate 10 14%
Other 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 49%
Engineering 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Computer Science 1 1%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 25 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 September 2015.
All research outputs
#4,179,510
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#477
of 2,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,874
of 264,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#10
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,648 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 264,262 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 66% of its contemporaries.