Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Factors Influencing the Outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, the outcome and indications of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are still controversial. We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive case series of UKA done by a single surgeon between 2004 and 2007 including 178 knees (140 patients). There were 31 lateral UKA and 147 medial UKA. With a minimum follow-up of 24 months (average 54 months) in 159 knees (other 19 knees were lost to follow-up at 3 to 18 months after surgery), 6 knees (3.8%, all medial UKA) were converted to total knee arthroplasty in 17 to 66 months (average 33 months). We found that the outcome of UKA was not influenced by the patient's age, body mass index, or early degeneration in the patellofemoral joint (PFJ). Compared with other reports, there was a greater proportion of lateral UKA in our series (17.4%). Although lateral UKA showed a trend toward less complications and implant failure compared with medial UKA, WOMAC scores (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) were similar between the two types of partial knee arthroplasty. Our results indicate that young age, obesity, and early degeneration in the PFJ may not be contraindications to UKA, and lateral UKA functions as well as, if not better than medial UKA. However, a long-term follow-up is required to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".