ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Coronal plane changes in fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacements: Clinical and revision outcomes.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2025. 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.
- Coronal plane changes in fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacements: Clinical and revision outcomes.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the relationship between coronal plane changes after mobile- and fixed-bearing (MB and FB) unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and clinical outcomes while also comparing revision rates and joint awareness between the two surgical modalities. Methods: Patients who operated between 2014 and 2017 with a UKR (FB or MB) were eligible for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were a minimum follow-up of 5 years, presence of clinical outcome scores, Forgotten Joint Scores and radiological data (joint obliquity angles, tibial component alignment, angle between the medial and lateral joint lines, change in overall knee alignment, change in the medial proximal tibial angle). Outcome variables were compared between the MB and FB UKRs, and correlation analyses were performed to assess the effect of radiological changes on clinical and awareness scores. Two separate researchers performed all radiological measurements on direct radiographs. Results: Out of 229 patients, 197 were eligible for inclusion. Basic demographic data (mean age, sex, body mass index and follow-up time) were comparable between the FB and MB groups. There were more revisions in the mobile bearing group (6.5% vs. 12.5%), though the results did not reach statistical significance. Clinical outcomes and joint awareness were similar in the two groups. Overall, the change in joint line obliquity or alignment was comparable between the groups. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes and joint awareness scores are similar in both fixed and mobile-bearing UKRs. Revision is more frequent, though not statistically significant, following an MB UKR. Overall, change in knee alignment and medio-lateral joint lines is similarly well tolerated in both implant modalities. Level of Evidence: Level III.
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.