Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39463465›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2024

Effect of design and surgical parameters variations in mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A finite element analysis.

Thomas Luyckx, Edoardo Bori, Rachele Saldari, Sara Fiore, Virginia Altamore, Bernardo Innocenti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. [Finite element analysis of tibial fracture risk following lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty under varying bone conditions].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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.

Thomas LuyckxDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery AZ Delta Roeselare Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5440-6132
Edoardo BoriBEAMS Department (Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems), École Polytechnique de Bruxelles Université Libre de Bruxelles Bruxelles Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1670-8359
Rachele SaldariBEAMS Department (Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems), École Polytechnique de Bruxelles Université Libre de Bruxelles Bruxelles Belgium.ORCID 0009-0007-9017-6884
Sara FioreBEAMS Department (Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems), École Polytechnique de Bruxelles Université Libre de Bruxelles Bruxelles Belgium.
Virginia AltamoreBEAMS Department (Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems), École Polytechnique de Bruxelles Université Libre de Bruxelles Bruxelles Belgium.
Bernardo InnocentiBEAMS Department (Bio Electro and Mechanical Systems), École Polytechnique de Bruxelles Université Libre de Bruxelles Bruxelles Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8992-8865

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKAs) are available in the market as fixed- and mobile-bearing (FB and MB) and can be characterised by a different set of design parameters in terms of geometries, materials and surgical approaches, with overall good clinical outcomes. However, clear biomechanical evidence concerning the consequences of variations of these features on knee biomechanics is still lacking; therefore, the present study aims to perform a sensitivity analysis to see which outcomes are affected by these variations. Methods: For both MB-UKA and FB-UKA, five design and surgical parameters were defined (bearing insert thickness, tibial component material, implant components friction coefficient, antero-posterior slope angle and level of tibial bone resection). Two control models were defined based on standard configurations for both implants. Finite element analysis was chosen to perform this study, and different parameter combinations (216 models in total) were implemented and tested at both 0° and 90° of flexion, using a previously validated finite element knee model. The results were then evaluated in terms of bone and polyethylene Von Mises stress and tibio-femoral contact area. Results: Bearing thickness, tibial bone cut and slope angle were found to be the most sensitive parameters for both types of UKAs. Specifically, changes in these parameters in the FB-UKA appeared to induce more significant variations in the polyethylene insert (both in terms of polyethylene stress and contact area), while in the MB-UKA, these changes influenced bone stress distribution more. Conclusions: Surgical parameters returned to have a more significant influence than material and friction variations; furthermore, the outcomes most affected by parameter variations were the insert-related ones for FB-UKA while for the MB-UKA were the ones regarding tibial bone stresses. Level of Evidence: Not Applicable.

Indexed as

design parametersfixed bearingmobile bearingsensitivity studyUKA

Identifiers

PMID39463465
PMCPMC11512207

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.