Polyethylene wear in Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Oxford Unicompartmental Knee replacement (UKR) was introduced as a design to reduce polyethylene wear. There has been one previous retrieval study involving this implant, which reported very low rates of wear in some specimens but abnormal patterns of wear in others. There has been no further investigation of these abnormal patterns. The bearings were retrieved from 47 patients who had received a medial Oxford UKR for anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee. None had been studied previously. The mean time to revision was 8.4 years (sd 4.1), with 20 having been implanted for over ten years. The macroscopic pattern of polyethylene wear and the linear penetration were recorded for each bearing. The mean rate of linear penetration was 0.07 mm/year. The patterns of wear fell into three categories, each with a different rate of linear penetration; 1) no abnormal macroscopic wear and a normal articular surface, n = 16 (linear penetration rate = 0.01 mm/year); 2) abnormal macroscopic wear and normal articular surfaces with extra-articular impingement, n = 16 (linear penetration rate = 0.05 mm/year); 3) abnormal macroscopic wear and abnormal articular surfaces with intra-articular impingement +/- signs of non-congruous articulation, n = 15 (linear penetration rate = 0.12 mm/year). The differences in linear penetration rate were statistically significant (p < 0.001). These results show that very low rates of polyethylene wear are possible if the device functions normally. However, if the bearing displays suboptimal function (extra-articular, intra-articular impingement or incongruous articulation) the rates of wear increase significantly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".