ArticleInternational orthopaedics2019
The patient results and satisfaction of knee arthroplasty in a validated grading system.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Obesity increases the risk of conversion to total knee arthroplasty after unicompartimental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Greater knee flexion and patient-reported function after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty than after total knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched study.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Patellofemoral arthroplasty in isolated Iwano grade IV patellofemoral osteoarthritis: 86% 10-year survival.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Outcomes of lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in post-traumatic osteoarthritis, a retrospective comparative study.International orthopaedics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe validated Knee Osteoarthritis Grading System (KOGS) was implemented and clinical results were compared with patient satisfaction data and implant survivorship in a multi-centre study with surgeons familiar with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This is also the first study to evaluate the prevalence of UKA and TKA in consecutive osteoarthritis (OA) knee arthroplasties assessed by this system..
methodA consecutive cohort of knees was gathered at three different institutions as categorized by KOGS and surgically treated with the recommended implant unless clinical reasons or patient preference precluded such an option. One thousand one hundred seventy-seven consecutive knees were evaluated including 311 TKA (26%), 695 medial UKA (59%), 154 lateral UKA (13%) and 17 PFA (2%) and the results of the categories evaluated with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the complications reflected in the different categories.
resultsThe failure rate of the UKA (3.5%) or TKA (1.6%) is not higher than accepted results in the literature and the difference in complications is negligible between the UKA (72%) and TKA (26%) cohorts. Revision of a UKA to a TKA as an endpoint was 0.58% with ipsilateral progression at 0.8% over a period of five to 84 months (mean follow-up of 36 months) despite the 'excessive' proportion of UKA in this cohort. The Oxford Score improvement is significant in TKA and UKA and contributes to the acceptable outcomes (The OKS for TKA improved from 20 pre-operatively to 36 post-operatively and the UKA improved from 22 pre-operatively to 39 post-operatively).
conclusionKOGS achieves acceptable early survival and functional results when implemented and is a suitable tool for identifying the preferred implant as was validated.
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.