IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/epw/ejmed0/v5y2023i1id41608.html

Does Posterior Stabilized Better than Posterior Cruciate Retaining in Total Knee Replacement? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Agus Eka Wiradiputra

    (Bhayangkara Denpasar Hospital, Indonesia)

  • Cokorda Gde Oka Dharmayuda

    (Udayana University, Indonesia)

  • Febyan

    (Udayana University, Indonesia)

Abstract

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the results of posterior stabilized and posterior cruciate-retaining prosthesis. To find randomized controlled studies comparing the clinical outcomes of cruciate-retaining and posterior-stabilized systems, a computerized literature search was performed. To find more pertinent studies, the table of contents of four significant orthopaedic journals and the references part of two arthroplasty text books were examined. Finally, 1114 individuals' knees totaling 1265 were compared. A statistical analysis showed that posterior-stabilized knees had significantly greater flexion and range of motion, but no change in complication rates. This's clinical significance is still unknown. The surgeon's preference and comfort level with a particular design should determine which design is used.

Suggested Citation

  • Agus Eka Wiradiputra & Cokorda Gde Oka Dharmayuda & Febyan, 2023. "Does Posterior Stabilized Better than Posterior Cruciate Retaining in Total Knee Replacement? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis," European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, European Open Science, vol. 5(1), pages 11-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:epw:ejmed0:v:5:y:2023:i:1:id:41608
    DOI: 10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.1.1608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/ejmed/article/view/41608
    File Function: Abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/ejmed/article/download/41608/9641
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.1.1608?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:epw:ejmed0:v:5:y:2023:i:1:id:41608. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/ejmed .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.