ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Biomechanical risk factors for tibial plateau fracture following Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a finite element analysis under gait loading.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tibial plateau fractures following Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), though rare (<1% incidence), represent serious postoperative complications that often necessitate complex revision surgery. This study aimed to systematically investigate the biomechanical risk factors for tibial plateau fractures following Oxford UKA by evaluating the effects of prosthesis positioning parameters on tibial stress distribution under dynamic gait loading. Methods: Ten distinct models were analyzed under ISO-standardized gait cycle loading to assess the impact of coronal alignment angles (-7°, -3°, 0°, 3°, 7°), sagittal bone cut (1 mm, 3 mm, 8 mm), and femoral-tibial prosthesis positioning (3 mm, 5 mm shifts). Maximum von-Mises stress on the tibial cortex was measured, with particular focus on the posterior medial cortex. Both von Mises stress and Maximum Principal Stress were evaluated to assess general equivalent loads and specific tensile fracture risks, respectively. Results: In the neutral position, maximum stress measured 19.01 MPa post-gait loading. Varus positioning at -3° yielded the minimum stress (18.06 MPa), while 7° valgus resulted in dramatically elevated stress (48.15 MPa, 2.5-fold increase). Longitudinal sagittal bone cut significantly influenced stress distribution: 1 mm over-cut increased stress to 28.21 MPa, 3 mm to 29.23 MPa, and 8 mm depth reached 45.10 MPa (2.3-fold increase). Femoral prosthesis displacement of 5 mm relative to the tibial component elevated posterior cortex stress to 33.24 MPa (1.7-fold increase from neutral). Notably, eversion-induced stress increases exceeded those from inversion, and these parameters exhibited nonlinear interactions. Principal stress analysis revealed that severe valgus alignment (7°) and deep sagittal cuts (8 mm) drastically concentrated tensile stresses at the posterior tibial cortex, peaking at 15.1 MPa and 12.56 MPa, respectively. Conclusion: Prosthesis malalignment (particularly excessive valgus beyond 3°) and depth of tibial sagittal osteotomy (>3 mm) are primary contributors to elevated tibial stress. Based on these biomechanical findings, we recommend that the Oxford unicompartmental prosthesis should be positioned at 3° varus in the coronal plane, the femoral-tibial prosthesis distance should not exceed 3 mm, and the longitudinal sagittal bone cut should be limited to 3 mm depth.
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.