Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25042552›Full record

ArticleOsteoarthritis and cartilage2014

Determinants of revision and functional outcome following unicompartmental knee replacement.

A D Liddle, A Judge, H Pandit, D W Murray

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. No difference in patient satisfaction after mobile bearing or fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. [Short-term effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for knee osteoarthritis in super-age patients].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A D LiddleNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK. Electronic address: Alexander.liddle@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.
A JudgeNIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, and MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK. Electronic address: Andrew.judge@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.
H PanditNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK. Electronic address: Hemant.pandit@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.
D W MurrayNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK. Electronic address: David.murray@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.
Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Arthritis Research UK 20499
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUnicompartmental Knee Replacement (UKR) has important advantages over total knee replacement (TKR) but has a higher revision rate. Outcomes vary between centres, suggesting that risk factors for revision may be modifiable with changes to patient selection or operative technique. The objective of this study was to determine factors affecting revision, patient-reported outcome and satisfaction following UKR.

method25,982 cases from three national databases were analysed. Multilevel multivariable regression models were used to examine the effect of patient and surgical factors on implant survival, patient-reported outcome and satisfaction at 6 months and 8 years following UKR.

resultsOf the 25,982 cases, 3862 (14.9%) had pre-operative and 6-month Oxford Knee Scores (OKS). Eight-year survival was 89.1% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 88.3-89.9). OKS increased from 21.9 (SD 7.6) to 37.5 (SD 9.5). Age (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.96 (95% CI 0.96-0.97) per year), male gender (HR 0.86 (95% CI 0.76-0.96)), unit size (HR 0.92 (95% CI 0.86-0.97) per case up to 40 cases/year) and operating surgeon grade (HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.91) if consultant) predicted improved implant survival. Older patients (≥ 75 years), and those with lower deprivation levels had superior OKS and satisfaction (adjusted mean difference 0.14 (95% CI 0.09-0.20) points per year of age and 0.93 (95% CI 0.60-1.27) per quintile of deprivation). Ethnicity, anxiety and co-morbidities also affected patient-reported outcome.

conclusionsThis study has identified important predictors of revision and patient-reported outcome following UKR. Older patients, who are least likely to be offered UKR, may derive the greatest benefits. Improved understanding of these factors may improve the long-term outcomes of UKR.

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisProsthesis FailureAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDatabases, FactualEnglandFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHemiarthroplastyHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateKnee JointMaleArthroplastyPatient-reported outcome measuresSatisfactionUnicompartmental knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID25042552
PMCPMC4164911
OpenAlexW2079678622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.