ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Comparison of clinical outcomes between mobile- and fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment osteoarthritis: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an established treatment for isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis (MCOA). The optimal choice between mobile-bearing (MB) and fixed-bearing (FB) designs remains debated, particularly in Asian populations where treatment costs and insurance policies influence surgical decisions. Objective: To compare short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes between MB and FB UKA and to evaluate potential implications for healthcare resource allocation. Methods: Sixty-four patients who underwent medial UKA between January 2022 and October 2024 were retrospectively analyzed (MB: Results: Both groups achieved significant improvements in VAS, HSS, and KSS scores (all Conclusions: MB and FB UKA provide comparable short-term pain relief and functional improvement. MB may offer greater alignment correction and range of motion, whereas FB was associated with lower hospitalization cost in this cohort and may therefore have a potential economic advantage. Prosthesis selection should consider both clinical performance and economic factors to optimize patient outcomes and resource utilization.
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.