The impact of a high tibial valgus osteotomy and unicondylar medial arthroplasty on the treatment for knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis
- 2.2k Downloads
Both high tibial valgus osteotomy (HTO) and unicompartmental medial knee arthroplasty (UKA) are established methods for the treatment for moderate stages of OA. This is the first global meta-analysis to compare the long-term effects of both methods regarding survival, outcomes and complications of total arthroplasty.
Literature research was performed using established medical databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (via OVID) and the Cochrane register. Criteria for inclusion were as follows: English or German papers, a clinical trial with a clear description of survival, an outcome evaluation using a well-described knee score and a follow-up >5 years. Statistical analysis was performed using the special meta-analysis software called “Comprehensive Meta Analysis” (version 2.0; Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA).
Final meta-analysis after the full-text review included 46 studies about valgus HTO and 43 studies about medial UKA. There were no significant differences between valgus HTO and medial UKA in terms of the number of total required replacements. After a 5- to 8-year follow-up, 91.0% of the valgus HTO patients and 91.5% of medial UKA patients did not need a total replacement. This value was 84.4% for valgus HTOs and 86.9% for medial UKAs after a 9- to 12-year follow-up. Mean survival time to TKA was 9.7 years after valgus HTO and 9.2 years after medial UKA. Clinical outcome was significantly better after medial UKA in a 5- to 12-year follow-up. After more than 12 years, results were comparable in both groups. No significant differences were seen in the complication rates.
This meta-analysis aimed to find the advantages and disadvantages of two established methods for the treatment for medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Valgus HTO is more appropriate for younger patients who accept a slight decrease in their physical activity. Medial UKA is appropriate for older patients obtaining sufficient pain relief but with reduced physical activity.
Level of evidence
KeywordsKnee Osteoarthritis Unicondylar arthroplasty Osteotomy Meta-analysis
- 5.Barck AL (1989) 10-year evaluation of compartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 4(Suppl:S49–S54)Google Scholar
- 11.BOA (1978) A knee function assessment chart. From the British Orthopaedic Association Research Sub-Committee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 60-B:308–309Google Scholar
- 22.De MP, Maquet P, Simonet J (1963) Biomechanical consideration of arthrosis of the knee. 1. Introduction. Some remarks on radiographs. Rev Rhum Mal Osteoartic 30:775–776Google Scholar
- 36.Ha’eri GB, Wiley AM (1980) High tibial osteotomy combined with joint debridement: a long-term study of results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 151:153–159Google Scholar
- 39.Heaton KT, Dorr LD (2003) History of knee arthroplasty. In: Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE, Simonian PT, Wickeewicz TL (eds) The adult knee. Lipincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 15–24Google Scholar
- 42.Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:506–511Google Scholar
- 47.Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14Google Scholar
- 60.Malik MH, Chougle A, Pradhan N, Gambhir AK, Porter ML (2005) Primary total knee replacement: a comparison of a nationally agreed guide to best practice and current surgical technique as determined by the North West Regional Arthroplasty Register. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 87:117–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 61.Maqut P (1963) A biomechanical treatment of femoro-patellar arthrosis: advancement of patellar tendon. Rev Rhum Mal Osteoartic 30:779–783Google Scholar
- 68.Naudie D, Guerin J, Parker DA, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH (2004) Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the Miller-Galante prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:1931–1935Google Scholar
- 73.Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, Drake GN (2003) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients sixty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A:1968–1973Google Scholar
- 74.Polyzois D, Stavlas P, Polyzois V, Zacharakis N (2006) The oblique high tibial osteotomy technique without bone removal and with rigid blade plate fixation for the treatment of medial osteoarthritis of the varus knee: medium and long-term results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:940–947PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 88.Sprenger TR, Doerzbacher JF (2003) Tibial osteotomy for the treatment of varus gonarthrosis. Survival and failure analysis to twenty-two years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A:469–474Google Scholar
- 89.Squire MW, Callaghan JJ, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC (1999) Unicompartmental knee replacement. A minimum 15 year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367:61–72Google Scholar
- 92.Stewart HD, Newton G (1992) Long-term results of the Manchester knee. Surface arthroplasty of the tibiofemoral joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res 278:138–146Google Scholar
- 105.Weale AE, Murray DW, Crawford R, Psychoyios V, Bonomo A, Howell G, O’Connor J, Goodfellow JW (1999) Does arthritis progress in the retained compartments after ‘Oxford’ medial unicompartmental arthroplasty? A clinical and radiological study with a minimum ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81:783–789PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar