ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2016
Promising short-term clinical results of the cementless Oxford phase III medial unicondylar knee prosthesis.
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cemented versus cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Changes in periprosthetic bone mineral density after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Cementless Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement-Clinical and Radiological Results of 228 Knees with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Midterm Results of Cementless and Cemented Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty with Mobile Meniscal Bearing: A Prospective Cohort Study.The open orthopaedics journal · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the short-term clinical results of the Oxford phase III cementless medial unicondylar knee prosthesis (UKP) compared to the cemented medial UKP.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study in a tertairy orthopedic centre between the period of May 2010 and September 2012. We included 99 medial UKP in 97 patients and of these UKP, 53 were cemented and 46 were cementless. Clinical outcome was measured using a questionnaire, containing a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, Oxford Knee score, Kujala score and SF-12 score. Knee function was tested using the American Knee Society score. Complications, reoperations and revisions were recorded. Statistical significance was defined as a P value < 0.05.
resultsIn a mean follow-up time of 19.5 mo, three cemented medial UKP were revised to a total knee prosthesis. Reasons for revision were malrotation of the tibial component, aseptic loosening of the tibial component and progression of osteoarthritis in the lateral- and patellofemoral compartment. In five patients a successful reoperation was performed, because of impingement or (sub)luxation of the polyethylene bearing. Patients with a reoperation were significant younger than patients in the primary group (56.7 vs 64.0, P = 0.01) and were more likely to be male (85.7% vs 38.8%, P = 0.015). Overall the cementless medial UKP seems to perform better, but the differences in clinical outcome are not significant; a VAS pain score of 7.4 vs 11.7 (P = 0.22), an Oxford Knee score of 43.3 vs 41.7 (P = 0.27) and a Kujala score of 79.6 vs 78.0 (P = 0.63). The American Knee Society scores were slightly better in the cementless group with 94.5 vs 90.2 (P = 0.055) for the objective score and 91.2 vs 87.8 (P = 0.25) for the subjective score.
conclusionThe cementless Oxford phase III medial UKP shows good short-term clinical results, when used in a specialist clinic by an experienced surgeon.
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.