ReviewOrthopaedic surgery2024
Challenges in Residual Bearing Removal: A Rare Case of Mobile Bearing Fracture in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with Literature Review.
Review in Orthopaedic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile bearing fracture is a rare long-term complication of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), and relevant reports are sparse. Hence, its treatment options need further exploration. CASE PRESENTATION: This study presents the case of fracture of a polyethylene insert that occurred 12 years after mobile bearing medial UKA in a 75-year-old overweight woman who then underwent surgical intervention at our institution. However, we encountered significant challenges in removing the fragments from the broken bearing, resulting in retention of the remaining one-third of the fragment. We solved this problem by replacing the fractured insert with thicker mobile bearing. During the 1-month postoperative follow-up, the patient achieved good range of motion and excellent satisfaction, with no reported complications and a Knee Society Score of 90. Additionally, we reviewed the literature on the treatment for mobile bearing fractures after UKA.
conclusionsBearing fracture is a rare cause of failure of mobile bearing UKA. This case highlights the challenges of UKA fracture bearing retrieval and underscores that mobile bearing replacement can be an effective intervention. The case we report shows that when removal of a residual meniscal bearing in a posterior dislocation is difficult to achieve, compromise may be an appropriate option because it does not cause additional complaints to the patient. This case emphasizes the importance of the surgeon having a thorough preoperative understanding of the location and potential pitfalls of fracture fragments in such situations.
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.