No association between different in tibial resection level and clinical outcomes six months after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Localized tibial strain is one of the hypotheses to explain residual pain after Oxford UKA. We evaluate whether the depth of the vertical cut during tibial resection correlates with medial knee pain. We aimed to investigate the association between the depth of tibial resection and medial knee pain after OUKA. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled 85 patients (mean age: 64.5 ± 7.7 years) who underwent cemented OUKA at our institute during October 2018-June 2019. The depth of tibial resection was measured intraoperatively as the thickness of the anterior, middle, and posterior parts. The greatest of the three thicknesses was recorded. Medial knee pain was assessed at 6 weeks and followed to 6 months. Patients were divided into the pain (P) and no pain (NP) groups. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic findings and OKS were compared between groups. We used logistic regression to analyze the independent association. RESULTS: The mean preoperative Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was 27.2 ± 7.6. The incidence of medial knee pain was 23.5% at 6 weeks after OUKA. The P group had a significantly lower OKS at 6 weeks compared to the NP group (28.9 ± 9.7 vs 33.7 ± 6.5, p = 0.049). There was no significant difference in the depth of tibial resection between groups. Medial knee pain had resolved by 6 months in all patients, and the 6-month OKS was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Medial knee pain was found to be common in the early postoperative period after OUKA, but this pain spontaneously resolved by 6 months. As a range of tibial resection level, post-operative pain is not associated with tibial resection thickness in this study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Institutional review board of Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol university. [SIRB 691/2560(EC4)].
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".