ArticleInternational orthopaedics2021
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: all-poly versus metal-backed tibial component-a long-term follow-up study.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of patellofemoral joint diseases on functional outcomes and prosthesis survival in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Long-term survivorship after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the influence of medical comorbidities and previous knee surgery.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- 'Wear advantage' of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is a myth: Higher volumetric wear without reduced revision rates compared to the fixed-bearing design: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Outcomes and short-term survivorship of fixed-bearing all-poly unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A retrospective single-center study of 42 prostheses with a main follow-up of 32.3 months.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Current concepts of medial unicompartmental knee replacement: part 2-hot topics and further directions.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Review
- Metal-backed versus all-poly tibia in the original cartier unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: outcomes and survivorship at long-term follow-up.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- All-Polyethylene Tibial Component in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Offers Excellent Survivorship and Clinical Outcomes at Short-Term Follow-Up: A Multicenter Retrospective Clinical Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Metal-backed or all-poly tibial components: which are better for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? A propensity-score-matching retrospective study at the 5-year follow-up.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024Article
- Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties: does the type of tibial component selected influence implant survival?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Lateral meniscus with tears or with histologic calcification does not increase the risk of lateral osteoarthritis after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Unicondylar Knee Prosthesis Treatment for Unicompartmental Osteoarthritis of the Knee Joint.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile considered a satisfactory solution, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) still raises concerns in regard to its durability. These concerns particularly focus on the tibial component. This study aims to compare two different cemented tibial components belonging to the same UKA design: all polyethylene (AP) versus metal backed (MB), at a long-term follow-up. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 143 successive patients, 83 of which underwent surgery with AP tibial component UKA (37 males, 46 females), and 67 with MB ones (17 males, 50 females). All implants had the same prosthetic design (Accuris UKA, Smith e Nephew) with identical femoral oxinium component but different tibial component, AP or MB. The KSS and KOOS were assessed at a mean of 11.5-year follow-up and compared to pre-operative, post-operative, and one year evaluation. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS for Mac (version 17.0). To assess potential statistically significant differences, t test was used and significance was set at P < 0.05.
resultsFinal KSS at a mean of 11.5-year follow-up was 94.27 for the AP group and 96.12 for the MB ones. The final KOOS was 87 for AP components and 89.67 for the MB group. These results demonstrated, in all cases, statistically significant better results for MB tibial components compared to AP regarding KSS (P = 0.048), KOOS (P = 0.000), and pain (P = 0.014) at the 11.5-year follow-up. Survivorship for AP tibial component implants was 97.6%, while it was 89.5% for MB ones.
conclusionWhile the survivorship rate has been found to be greater for AP implants compared to MB tibial components, this study reveals statistically better functional results according to KSS and KOOS, and pain, at a long-term follow-up for MB implants.
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.