ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: is really a good option?
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ninety-three point seven percent pooled 10-year survival rate following lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for isolated lateral knee osteoarthritis-A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Clinical and radiological results of allogenous bone graft versus synthetic calcium-phosphate graft in opening wedge high tibial osteotomy.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (LUKA) account for only < 1% of all knee arthroplasties and for only 5-10% of all unicompartmental knee replacements. This means that there is less published literature on these procedures and that the surgeon's experience with them is smaller than with medial UKA. The aim of this study was to analyze the survival and the clinical-functional outcomes of LUKA according to the type of bearing surface (all-polyethylene versus metal-backed) used. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective study including 42 LUKAs operated between 2009 and 2021. Two fixed polyethylene-bearing models were used: the all-polyethylene ACCURIS knee (38%) and the metal-backed Triathlon PKR system (62%). Demographic parameters, knee range of motion (ROM), tibiofemoral alignment, implant survival (as estimated with the Kaplan-Meier curve), and clinical-functional outcomes (as measured with the Knee Society Score) were analyzed.
resultsAverage patient age was 65.5 (range, 36-87) years and mean follow-up was 8.2 (range, 2.1-12.8) years. Thirty LUKAs (71.4%) were implanted in women. The main reason for performing a LUKA was osteoarthritis (88.1%). No patient developed post-surgical complications or had to be re-operated. Overall LUKA survival was 100% at 1-year and 5-year's follow-up. Knee Society Score, knee ROM and tibiofemoral alignment all improved significantly post-surgery (p < 0.001). The clinical Knee Society Score increased from 46.5 ± 14.5 pre-surgery to 93.5 ± 10.3 post-surgery, the functional Knee Society Score increased from 48.1 ± 13.5 pre-surgery to 94.6 ± 9.3 post-surgery, maximum flexion increased from 108.5 ± 8.7 degrees pre-surgery to 121 ± 8.9 degrees post-surgery and tibiofemoral alignment was corrected from 13.1 ± 1.74 degrees pre-surgery to 5.7 ± 0.8 degrees post-surgery. There were no statistically significant clinical-functional improvement or knee ROM differences between groups (p < 0.05, respectively).
conclusionLUKA is a valid and definitive option for patients with lateral tibiofemoral osteoarthritis, with a survival rate of > 95% at 5-years follow-up. Clinical-functional outcomes are the same, irrespective of the tibial component used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39256276What 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.