Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33512583›Full record

SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2021

Unicondylar knee replacement versus total knee replacement for the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Meichao Deng, Yang Hu, Zhongzu Zhang, Hongjun Zhang, Yiming Qu, Gaohai Shao

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Return to work following knee arthroplasty: a retrospective review in urban Asian population.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Meichao DengThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 439 Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan, Chongqing, China.
Yang HuThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 439 Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan, Chongqing, China.
Zhongzu ZhangThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 439 Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan, Chongqing, China.
Hongjun ZhangThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 439 Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan, Chongqing, China.
Yiming QuThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 439 Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan, Chongqing, China.
Gaohai ShaoThe Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, 439 Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan, Chongqing, China. shaogaohai567@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5084-2386
Chongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the optimal surgery for isolated medial knee osteoarthritis (OA) is unclear, this study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of unicondylar knee replacement (UKR) with total knee replacement (TKR) for simple medial knee OA.

methodsLiterature searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to 1th April 2020. Only studies comparing UKR with TKR for isolated medial knee OA were included. Data collection and extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were performed according to the Cochrane standards.

resultsA total of 13 articles with 1888 patients were included, among which, 944 and 944 underwent UKR and TKR, respectively. The analyzed postoperative outcomes were mostly within 5 years of follow-up. The meta-analysis showed that UKR improved knee general function (P < 0.00001) and health (P = 0.02), moreover, reduced post-operative pain (P = 0.01) and complications (P < 0.05) more than TKR. There were no significant differences in postoperative revision (P = 0.252), high-activity arthroplasty score (HAAS) (P = 0.307) and Oxford knee score (OKS) (P = 0.15) between the two techniques.

conclusionsThe patients of UKR could achieve better clinical results than that of TKR, moreover, there were negligible differences between the two techniques in postoperative revision in the early and mid-term follow-up and surgeons should be aware of the important reasons for revision of UKR. Thus, UKR instead of TKR should be performed in patients with late-stage isolated medial knee OA.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisOsteoarthritis, KneeHumansKnee JointPostoperative PainReoperationTreatment OutcomeArthroplastyMedial knee osteoarthritisMeta-analysisTotal knee replacementUnicondylar knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID33512583
PMCPMC8295078
OpenAlexW3121242356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.