ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Patient-specific versus off-the-shelf unicompartmental knee arthroplasty during level walking.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Stair negotiation following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of biomechanical outcomes.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Three dimensional printing in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: current evidence and future directions.International orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Lower re-revision rates after UKA-to-TKA than UKA-to-UKA revision for failed medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at mid-term follow-up.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Patient-specific versus off-the-shelf unicompartmental knee arthroplasty during level walking.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Personalised unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) improves tibial implant positioning and clinical outcomes compared to an off-the-shelf UKA. However, no biomechanical study has confirmed the functional superiority of custom implants. The study aimed to assess potential differences between personalised and off-the-shelf UKA in knee joint function in terms of both biomechanical and clinical outcomes during level walking. Methods: Twenty-two patients and 22 healthy individuals (control group [CG]), matched for age and height, were recruited. Eight patients were implanted with a Bodycad UKS (BUKS) prosthesis, and 14 patients with an Oxford UKA (OUKA) prosthesis. Participants walked barefoot along a 10 m walkway. To quantify 3D kinematics and kinetics, a 10-camera motion analysis system and four force plates were used. The knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) was utilised to measure knee function. 3D lower limbs angles and moments were estimated, and total support moment (TSM) was calculated. Biomechanical outcomes were compared along the gait cycle (GC) (0%-100%) between groups using statistical parametric mapping (SPM). Results: The results showed higher KOOS total score for BUKS compared to OUKA ( Conclusions: BUKS patients demonstrated similar knee function compared to OUKA. OUKA group exhibited a protective mechanism by reducing the knee extension. Neither BUKS nor OUKA restored knee joint function comparable to a native knee, with compensation mechanism occurring through adjacent joints. 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.