ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of perioperative analgesia between posterior stabilized and posterior cruciate retaining prostheses following total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPosterior-stabilized (PS) and posterior cruciate retaining (CR) prostheses constitute the most widely used knee prostheses. This study aimed to determine the effects of PS and CR prostheses on postoperative analgesia following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and provide a reliable clinical basis for optimizing postoperative analgesic effects.
methodsOverall, 120 consecutive patients were enrolled in this study and classified into PS (n = 60) and CR (n = 60) groups according to the type of prosthesis used. All patients underwent TKA along with spinal anesthesia. All patients received adductor canal block (ACB) and periarticular infiltration (PAI) for postoperative analgesia. The primary outcomes comprised visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest and during movement (extension and flexion exercises) measured till 72 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were as follows: preoperative VAS scores, preoperative hospital for special surgery knee scores, tourniquet duration, and femur and tibia osteotomies.
resultsThe 12-h postoperative VAS scores at rest and during movement were significantly lower in the CR group than in the PS group (0.71 ± 1.36 vs. 1.36 ± 0.95 and 2.02 ± 1.85 vs. 2.81 ± 1.25, P < 0.05). The 24-h postoperative VAS scores at rest were significantly lower in the CR group than in the PS group (1.85 ± 1.40 vs. 2.47 ± 0.97, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the VAS scores between the groups at other timepoints at rest and during movement. Tourniquet duration was significantly shorter in the CR group than in the PS group (82.57 ± 11.12 min vs. 73.10 ± 10.74 min, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the extent of osteotomies on the medial and lateral sides of the femur and tibia between the groups.
conclusionAt 24 h after surgery, multimodal analgesia with ACB and PAI provides better analgesic effects in patients who undergo CR prosthesis replacement compared with those who undergo PS prosthesis replacement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.