ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2017
Cementless versus cemented Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: early results of a non-designer user group.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 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
- Comparable incidence of periprosthetic tibial fractures in cementless and cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is safe and effective at a minimum follow-up of 4.2 years: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Undersizing of the tibial component in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) increases the risk of periprosthetic fractures.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Painful Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Etiology, Diagnosis and Management.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2024Review
- No association between different in tibial resection level and clinical outcomes six months after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty results in higher pain levels compared to the cemented technique: a prospective register study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Article
- Outcomes of cementless fixation in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: review of recent literature.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2021Review
- Femoral migration of the cementless Oxford which caused the bearing dislocation: a report of two cases.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- 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
- [Research progress in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2020Article
- Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current indications, technical issues and results.EFORT open reviews · 2018Article
- Results after Cementless Medial Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement - Incidence of Radiolucent Lines.PloS one · 2017Article
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough fewer tibial radiolucent lines are observed in cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared with cemented Oxford UKA, an independent comparative study on this topic is lacking.
methodsIn this multicentre retrospective study, a cohort of 60 consecutive cases of cementless Oxford UKA is compared with a cohort of 60 consecutive cases of cemented Oxford UKA. Radiolucent lines, survival, perioperative data and clinical results were compared.
resultsNo complete tibial radiolucent lines were observed in either group. Seventeen per cent of partial tibial radiolucent lines were observed in the cementless group versus 21 % in the cemented group (n.s.). The percentage of tibial radiolucent zones was 4 versus 9 %, respectively (p = 0.036). Survival rates were 90 % at 34 months for the cementless group and 84 % at 54 months for the cemented group (n.s.). Mean operation time was 10 min shorter in the cementless group (p < 0.001), and clinical results were not significantly different.
conclusionsAlthough no significant differences in radiolucent lines were found between both groups, they appear to be more common in the cemented group. This confirms previous results from reports by prosthesis designers. The presence of radiolucent lines after cemented Oxford UKA does not correlate with clinical outcome or survival. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27161197What 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.