ArticleInternational journal of surgery case reports2026
Beyond conversion to TKA: selective tibial component revision for failed medial UKA (case report).
Article in International journal of surgery case reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) can offer faster recovery and less surgical trauma than total knee arthroplasty (TKA) when osteoarthritis is confined to one compartment, but it carries a higher revision risk. When UKA fails, conversion to TKA is most common. Selective (component-only) revision is controversial because registry studies report higher re-revision rates. Case presentation: A 60-year-old man developed aseptic loosening of the tibial component 6 months after a cemented medial UKA. Infection was excluded, and imaging/clinical assessment confirmed a well-fixed femoral component, intact ligaments, and no progression in the lateral or patellofemoral compartments. After shared decision-making, we revised only the loose tibial component and exchanged the polyethylene insert. At 36 months, the patient had no pain or functional limitation, Knee Society Scores of 89 (knee) and 90 (function), WOMAC 13/96, and no radiographic loosening. Clinical discussion: Early isolated tibial loosening is most consistent with technical or mechanical factors (alignment, fixation, and micromotion) rather than biological failure. This report details evaluation steps, operative considerations, and counseling points, and proposes an algorithm for selecting selective tibial revision versus conversion to TKA. Conclusion: Selective tibial revision may succeed in highly selected patients, but conversion to TKA remains the standard. Patients should be counseled that registry and comparative studies suggest higher re-revision rates after UKA-to-UKA revisions.
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.