Mid-Term Results for Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and functional results for a series of patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) at mid-term follow-up. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study included 32 patients with isolated medial compartment arthritis who underwent unilateral UKA. Outcomes were assessed using pre- and postoperative Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and Knee Society Score (KSS) metrics. RESULTS: On physical examination at a follow-up of at least 5 years, mean knee flexion was 121° , mean knee extension was 2°, and mean varus angulation was 2°. At post-operative evaluation, the mean WOMAC score was 96.12 and the mean KSS score was 93. Pre- and postoperative WOMAC and KSS scores were evaluated by paired Student's t-tests; p < 0.001 determined a highly significant difference. DISCUSSION: Early UKA designs had poor outcomes. Newer implant designs and specific patient selection criteria have been reported to be associated with improved outcomes. This study examined mid-term outcomes (mean duration of follow-up, 5 years). CONCLUSION: The clinical and functional results of UKA at 5-year follow-up were shown to be satisfactory. Longer follow-up is needed to determine whether UKA provides satisfactory long-term outcomes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".