↓ Skip to main content

Total knee arthroplasty in a patient with a fused ipsilateral hip

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Total knee arthroplasty in a patient with a fused ipsilateral hip
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13018-015-0271-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin Koo, Khang Chiang Pang, Wilson Wang

Abstract

Many patients undergoing total knee replacement for joint degeneration may have cartilage wear in other joints and thus may already have had various other surgical procedures performed for these. To date, there is no data or description in the medical literature detailing how to perform a total knee replacement in a patient who previously underwent an ipsilateral hip fusion. We describe how this is done in a patient who had her ipsilateral hip fused in 30° of flexion. This presents a surgical challenge because the knee can only be flexed to 70° if done in the conventional supine position. This not only makes exposure more difficult but can also lead to complications including component malpositioning and extensor mechanism problems, such as patellar tendon rupture. We present this case study and describe, with the aid of a series of intra-operative photographs, how this can be performed, with special focus on patient positioning to optimize knee exposure in a patient with a previous hip fusion. The modifications made during surgery allowed the knee replacement to be carried out uneventfully. The patient recovered well and was able to return to her usual activities. We had to make various modifications to the intra-operative positioning in order to carry out the surgery. We hope these practical pointers will help clinicians faced with a similar situation in the future.

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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 13 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Psychology 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Unknown 13 52%
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 11 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,822,669
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#588
of 1,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,075
of 266,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#13
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,368 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 53% 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 266,176 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 41 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 56% of its contemporaries.