ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2021
No difference in patient satisfaction after mobile bearing or fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lower re-revision rates after UKA-to-TKA than UKA-to-UKA revision for failed medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at mid-term follow-up.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Mobile Versus Fixed-Bearing in Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: An Average 10-Year Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- 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
- Comparison of early curative effects of lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty and the legacy constrained condylar knee arthroplasty in the treatment of isolated lateral osteoarthritis: a single-center retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for Kellgren-Lawrence grade 3-4 knee osteoarthritis in younger patients: comparable improvements in patient-reported outcomes, adjusted for osteoarthritis grade and sex.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
- Mobile bearing versus fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee replacement: an independent two center matched-pairs analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- [Short-term effectiveness of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients younger than 60 years of age].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2022Article
- Mobile Bearing versus Fixed Bearing for Unicompartmental Arthroplasty in Monocompartmental Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- More AnteriorFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Wear Morphology on the Surfaces of CoCrMo Unicompartmental Knee Joint Endoprostheses as Elements of Metal-Metal Friction Nodes.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMedial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has excellent survival rates using one of the two implant designs: mobile bearing (MB) or fixed bearing (FB). There is a lack of studies comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of both implants. This study aimed to document and compare PROs of MB UKA to FB UKA at 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery.
methodsA single high-volume surgeon, retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data of two groups of UKA patients, with a MB (n = 66) or FB (n = 97) implant. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction (0-10; NRS). Secondary outcomes were pain at rest (NRS), pain during activity (NRS), function (OKS, KOOS-PS), quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), anchor pain, anchor function and anchor recovery. PROs were collected 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. The complication rate and revision rate within one year after surgery were recorded.
resultsFor the MB group, the median NRS satisfaction score was 9.0 (8.0-10.0) compared to 9.0 (8.0-9.5) for the FB group at 6 months (p = 0.620). Similar scores were found at 12 and 24 months; both MB 9.0 (8.0-10.0) and FB 9.0 (8.0-10.0) (p = 0.556 and p = 0.522, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between MB and FB groups in all secondary outcomes postoperatively.
conclusionMedial UKA performed by a high-volume surgeon, using a MB or a FB implant, results in excellent patient satisfaction, pain relief, functional improvement and quality of life improvement at 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The recommendation and use of one over the other is not justified based on the outcomes in the current study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.