ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2015
Survival analysis and functional outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement up to 11 years follow up at a District General Hospital.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Revision indications for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Cementless unicompartmental knee replacement achieves better ten-year clinical outcomes than cemented: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Pooled it
- Long-term outcomes of over 8,000 medial Oxford Phase 3 Unicompartmental Knees-a systematic review.Acta orthopaedica · 2018Pooled it
- The Anterior Impingement After Mobile-Bearing Unicomparimental Knee Arthroplasty-A Neglected Problem. A Clinical Report of 14 Cases.Arthroplasty today · 2022Article
- Unicompartmental knee replacement - Current perspectives.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and traumaReview
- TRENDS IN UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY.Acta ortopedica brasileiraArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere have been several large originator studies reporting excellent results with this prosthesis but far fewer large independent studies. We present, to our knowledge, the largest independent series documenting excellent survivorship rates and good functional outcomes at a mean follow up of 5.5 years post implantation of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement.
methodsOur prospective study looks at the survivorship and the functional outcome of 364 Oxford UKRs performed in a district general hospital at a mean follow up of 5.5 years (range 5-11 years). Post operatively knees were assessed in a research clinic using the Oxford knees score (as well as the American Knee Society Score and the Hospital for Special Surgery Score). Maximal flexion was also measured.
resultsThere were 26 revisions of 364 knees giving a survivorship, with revision as the end point, of 93% at a mean of 5.5 years post op (range 5-11 years). We achieved an Oxford score of 37.5, a mean AKSS of 161 (divided as American knee functional score 75.75/American knee objective score 85.4 (excellent)). The mean HSS score was 84.5. We achieved 'Excellent' Oxford knee scores in 137 knees (48%), 'Good' in 75 (26%), 'Moderate' in 51 (17%) and 'Poor' in only 27 (9%) of knees. Mean improvement in functional scores were: Oxford score (14.4), AKSS (71) and HSS (26.3). Mean maximal flexion was 123° range (110-140).
conclusionsWe have confirmed that good medium to long-term function and survival can be obtained following Oxford medial knee replacement for treating anteromedial osteoarthritis, in our large independent series.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.