Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33630155›Full record

SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2022

Revision indications for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Mei Lin Tay, Sue R McGlashan, A Paul Monk, Simon W Young

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Insufficient evidence to confirm benefits of custom partial knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients with Parkinson's disease.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Periprosthetic Joint Infection WithCase reports in orthopedics · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
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

4 authors.

Mei Lin TayDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, North Shore Hospital, 124 Shakespeare Road, Takapuna, 0622, Auckland, New Zealand. m.tay@auckland.ac.nz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1704-120X
Sue R McGlashanDepartment of Anatomy and Medical Imaging, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, 85 Park Road, Grafton, 1023, Auckland, New Zealand.
A Paul MonkDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Auckland City Hospital, 2 Park Road, Grafton, 1023, Auckland, New Zealand.
Simon W YoungDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, North Shore Hospital, 124 Shakespeare Road, Takapuna, 0622, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUnicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has advantages over total knee arthroplasty including fewer complications and faster recovery; however, UKAs also have higher revision rates. Understanding reasons for UKA failure may, therefore, allow for optimized clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify failure modes for medial UKAs, and to examine differences by implant bearing, cement use and time. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic review was conducted by searching MedLine, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases from 2000 to 2020. Studies were selected if they included ≥ 250 participants, ≥ 10 failures and reported all failure modes of medial UKA performed for osteoarthritis (OA).

resultsA total of 24 cohort and 2 registry-based studies (levels II and III) were selected. The most common failure modes were aseptic loosening (24%) and OA progression (30%). Earliest failures (< 6 months) were due to infection (40%), bearing dislocation (20%), and fracture (20%); mid-term failures (> 2 years to 5 years) were due to OA progression (33%), aseptic loosening (17%) and pain (21%); and late-term (> 10 years) failures were mostly due to OA progression (56%). Rates of failure from wear were higher with fixed-bearing prostheses (5% cf. 0.3%), whereas rates of bearing dislocations were higher with mobile-bearing prostheses (14% cf. 0%). With cemented components, there was a high rate of failure due to aseptic loosening (27%), which was reduced with uncemented components (4%).

conclusionsUKA failure modes differ depending on implant design, cement use and time from surgery. There should be careful consideration of implant options and patient selection for UKA.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisOsteoarthritis, KneeHumansKnee JointProsthesis FailureReoperationTreatment OutcomeMedialOsteoarthritisRevisionSystematic reviewUnicompartmental knee arthroplastyUnicompartmental knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID33630155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.