In this research, we aimed to perform a comprehensive bioinformatic analysis of immune cell infiltration in osteoarthritic cartilage and synovium and identify potential risk genes. Datasets were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus database. We integrated the datasets, removed the batch effects and analyzed immune cell infiltration along with differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) was used to identify the positively correlated gene modules. LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator)-cox regression analysis was performed to screen the characteristic genes. The intersection of the DEGs, characteristic genes and module genes was identified as the risk genes. The WGCNA analysis demonstrates that the blue module was highly correlated and statistically significant as well as enriched in immune-related signaling pathways and biological functions in the KEGG and GO enrichment. LASSO-cox regression analysis screened 11 characteristic genes from the hub genes of the blue module. After the DEG, characteristic gene and immune-related gene datasets were intersected, three genes, PTGS1, HLA-DMB and GPR137B, were identified as the risk genes in this research. In this research, we identified three risk genes related to the immune system in osteoarthritis and provide a feasible approach to drug development in the future.

Background: Cemented and uncemented fixation are the primary methods of tibial prosthesis fixation in total knee arthroplasty. However, the optimal fixation method remains controversial. This article explored whether uncemented tibial fixation has better clinical and radiological outcomes, fewer complications, and revision rates compared to cemented tibial fixation. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared uncemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and cemented TKA. The outcome assessment consisted of clinical and radiological outcomes, complications (aseptic loosening, infection, and thrombosis), and revision rate. Subgroup analysis was used to explore the effects of different fixation methods on knee scores in younger patients. Results: Nine RCTs were finally analyzed with 686 uncemented knees and 678 cemented knees. The mean follow-up time was 12.6 years. The pooled data revealed significant advantages of uncemented fixations over cemented fixations in terms of the Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS) (p = 0.01) and the Knee Society Score–Pain (KSS–Pain) (p = 0.02). Cemented fixations showed significant advantages in maximum total point motion (MTPM) (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between uncemented fixation and cemented fixation regarding functional outcomes, range of motion, complications, and revision rates. When comparing among young people (<65 years), the differences in KSKS became statistically insignificant. No significant difference was shown in aseptic loosening and the revision rate among young patients. Conclusions: The current evidence shows better knee score, less pain, comparable complications and revision rates for uncemented tibial prosthesis fixation, compared to cemented, in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty.