SynthesisFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
No difference between CT- and MRI-based patient-specific instrumentation for total knee arthroplasty: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- To scan or not to scan? The image debate in robotic joint arthroplasty.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Object: Our previous systematic review of either computed tomography (CT)-based or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) systems in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) included literature up to June 2016. However, the quickly evolving field warranted an update. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide updated, evidence-based insights comparing the outcomes of CT-based versus MRI-based PSI systems in TKA. Methods: We conducted comprehensive searches of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception to February 2025. Prospective comparative trials that compared CT-based versus MRI-based PSI systems for TKA were included. Our predefined primary outcome was the incidence of outliers in overall coronal limb alignment. Secondary outcomes encompassed the accuracy of component alignment, operation time, and clinical outcomes. Results: Nine publications reporting seven eligible trials were identified. Six trials involving a total of 407 knees were included for qualitative analysis, with five trials suitable for quantitative meta-analysis. The integrated results revealed no significant differences between CT- and MRI-based PSI systems concerning the outlier incidence of coronal overall limb alignment, the outlier incidence of coronal/sagittal alignment of the femoral/tibial component, the angular errors of coronal overall limb alignment, the angular errors of the femoral/tibial component in the coronal plane, or incidence of change of implant size of the femoral/tibial component. However, CT-based PSI systems were associated with significantly greater angular errors in coronal limb alignment (mean difference [MD]: 0.69°; 95% CI, 0.03°-1.36°; Conclusion: This finding is inconsistent with our previous study. Contrary to our previous findings, current evidence indicates no significant difference in alignment outcomes between CT-based and MRI-based PSI systems for TKA. Additionally, short-to mid-term clinical outcomes were comparable between the two imaging modalities. Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD42022339910.
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.