Background
Materials and methods
Search strategy
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
-
Original meta-analyses.
-
Analyses of studies comparing UKA and HTO for medial knee OA.
-
Studies with the following outcomes were included:oFunctional scores, such as the Lysholm Knee Score (Lysholm), Knee Society Score (KSS), range of motion (ROM), and proportion of patients with excellent/good functional results.pComplication rates (e.g., for infection or thrombosis).qImplant survival and revision rates, such as Kaplan–Meier analysis of revision rates and implant survival time to total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
-
Data were reported only for the UKA or HTO group, and no comparisons were made between the two groups.
-
Duplicate reports.
Data extraction
Study quality assessment
Interpretation of results
Results
Open literature search
Author /Year | Number of studies assessed | Number of knees (UKA/HTO) | Follow-up, months (range) | Outcomes reported by ≥ 3 studies | Number of original studies | HTO type, number of studies | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Functional results | ROM | Velocity | Pain | Revision rate | Complication rate | ||||||
Migliorini et al. [7] | RCT 1 Retrospective 6 | 311/307 | 24–90 | Yes | Yes | 7 | OW 7 CW 0 | ||||
Bai et al. [35] | RCT 2 Retrospective 11 | 332/379 | 12–120 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 13 | NA | ||
Huang et al. [17] | Prospective 1 Retrospective 7 | 304/371 | 30–84 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 8 | OW 8 CW 0 | |
Cao et al. [3] | RCT 2 Retrospective 7 Register Study 1 | 5305/868 | 0–90 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 | OW 6 CW 3 | |
Santoso et al. [5] | RCT 3 Prospective 2 Retrospective 9 Register Study 1 | 5497/1041 | 0–204 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 15 | OW-HTO 6 CW-HTO 7 |
Han et al. [19] | RCT 4 Prospective 3 Retrospective 9 | 603/591 | 0–204 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 16 | OW 5 CW 11 |
Fu et al. [21] | RCT 3 Prospective 2 Retrospective 5 Register Study 1 | 5081/759 | 0–204 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 11 | OW-HTO 3 CW-HTO 7 | |
Spahn et al. [6] | UKA 40 HTO 43 Comparative Studies 3 | 4742/4090 | 60–240 | Yes | Yes | Yes | 93 | OW-HTO 4 CW-HTO 38 | |||
Zhang et al. [16] | RCT 3 Prospective 1 Retrospective 3 | 196/219 | 12–204 | Yes | Yes | Yes | 7 | OW 1 CW 5 | |||
Gandhi et al. [20] | RCT 3 Prospective 1 Retrospective 2 | 186/176 | 6–93.6 | Yes | Yes | Yes | 6 | OW 1 CW 5 |
Author/Year | Clinical and functional results | Revision rates | Complications rates | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Effect size [95% CI] | P value | na | For | Effect size [95% CI] | P value | na | For | Effect size [95% CI] | P value | na | For | ||||
Migliorini et al. [7] | Tegner | MD 0.69 [0.03–1.35] | .04 | UKA | 5 years revision rate | OR 2.27 [0.50–10.34] | .004 | UKA | |||||||
Lysholm | MD 3.07 [1.19–4.95] | .001 | UKA | Kaplan‒Meier curve | .01 | UKA | |||||||||
IKDC | MD 8.89 [4.29–13.48] | .0001 | UKA | ||||||||||||
KOOS | MD 2.27 [− 4.23–8.77] | .05 | UKA | ||||||||||||
Bai et al. [35] | Tegner | MD 0.00 [-0.18–0.18] | .97 | 5 | n.s | Revision rate | OR 1.17 [0.48–2.82] | .73 | 4 | n.s | Total Complications rate | OR 0.51 [0.24–1.07] | 0.07 | 9 | n. s |
Lysholm | MD 0.84 [0.29–1.39] | .003 | 6 | UKA | Infection rate | OR 0.91 [0.24–3.50] | 0.89 | 4 | n. s | ||||||
E/G results | OR 1.34 [0.49–3.67] | .57 | 4 | n.s | |||||||||||
ROM | MD − 5.47 [− 9.53 to − 1.41] | .008 | 7 | HTO | |||||||||||
Huang et al. [17] | HSS | MD 1.25 [− 3.70–1.20] | .32 | 3 | n.s | Revision rate | OR 0.38 [0.07–1.89] | .23 | 4 | n.s | Total Complications rate | OR 1.11 [0.49–12.49] | 0.81 | 7 | n.s |
Lysholm | MD − 0.90 [− 3.70–1.89] | .53 | 2 | n.s | |||||||||||
ROM | MD 10.18 [2.49–17.86] | .009 | 3 | HTO | |||||||||||
velocity | MD 0.02 [− 0.09–0.04] | .49 | 3 | n.s | |||||||||||
Cao et al. [3] | Lysholm | MD 4.99 [− 3.91–13.09] | .27 | 2 | n.s | Revision rate | OR 0.52 [0.30–0.90] | .02 | 8 | UKA | Complications (total) | OR 0.42 [0.20–0.89] | 0.02 | 5 | UKA |
KSS | MD − 4.03 [− 9.91–1.85] | .18 | 2 | n.s | Complications (RCT) | OR 0.20 [0.04–1.00] | 0.05 | 1 | UKA | ||||||
E/G results | OR 2.18 [0.58–8.23] | .25 | 4 | n.s | Complications (n-RCT) | OR 0.54 [0.22–1.30] | 0.17 | 4 | n.s | ||||||
ROM | SMD − 0.85[− 1.43 to − 0.27] | 0.04 | 4 | HTO | |||||||||||
Pain | OR 5.65 [1.24–25.81] | .03 | 2 | UKA | |||||||||||
Santoso et al. [5] | Knee scores b | STD − 0.21 [− 0.47–0.05] | 0.11 | 7 | n.s | Revision rate | OR 1.18 [0.54–2.58] | 0.68 | 11 | n.s | Complications rate | OR 3.08 [1.76–5.39] | < 0.0001 | 7 | UKA |
E/G results | OR 0.37 [0.24–0.58] | < 0.00001 | 10 | UKA | |||||||||||
Subgroup: E/G CW-HTO-UKA | OR 0.36 [0.21–0.61] | 0.01 | 6 | UKA | |||||||||||
Subgroup: E/G OW-HTO-UKA | OR 0.70 [0.26–1.91] | 0.49 | 3 | n.s | |||||||||||
ROM | SMD 0.78 [0.21, 1.36] | 0.008 | 5 | HTO | |||||||||||
Velocity | SMD − 0.09 [− 0.48, 0.30] | 0.66 | 3 | n.s | |||||||||||
Pain | OR 0.34 [0.13, 0.91] | 0.03 | 5 | UKA | |||||||||||
Han et al. [19] | E/G results | OR 0.47 [0.24–0.95] | 0.04 | 10 | UKA | Revision–TKA (total) | OR 1.56 [0.61–3.98] | 0.35 | 7 | n.s | Complications rate | OR 2.48 [1.26 to 4.90] | 0.009 | 8 | UKA |
ROM | MD 8.62 [2.02–15.23] | 0.01 | 6 | HTO | Subgroup: CW-HTO vs. UKA | OR 2.38 [1.05–5.42] | 0.04 | 4 | UKA | ||||||
Pain | OR 0.28 [0.12–0.62] | 0.002 | 4 | UKA | Subgroup: OW-HTO vs. UKA | OR 0.24 [0.03–2.00] | 0.19 | 3 | n.s | ||||||
Velocity | MD − 0.05 [− 0.11 to − 0.00] | 0.03 | 4 | UKA | |||||||||||
Fu et al. [21] | Knee scoresc | SMD 0.78 [− 0.75, 2.30] | 0.32 | 4 | n.s | Revision rate | OR 0.82 [0.30–2.21] | 0.69 | 7 | n.s | Complication rate | OR 2.00 [0.62, 6.50] | 0.25 | 4 | n.s |
E/G results | OR 0.43 [0.26, 0.69] | 0.0006 | 8 | UKA | |||||||||||
ROM | SMD 1.36 [1.05, 1.67] | < 0.00001 | 5 | HTO | |||||||||||
Velocity | SMD − 0.49 [− 0.98, 0.01] | 0.05 | 3 | UKA | |||||||||||
Spahn et al. [6] Fu et al. [21] | normalized knee scoresd | Survival to endpoint TKA rate | Complication rate | ||||||||||||
5–8 years of follow-up | HTO 83.4 [82.6–84.2] | < 0.001 | 7 | UKA | 5–8 years of follow-up | HTO 0.910 [0.882–0.932] | 0.801 | 30 | n.s | HTO 0.138 [0.107, 0.177] | UKA 0.113 [0.079, 0.168] | 0.369 | UKA 31/HTO 13 | n.s | |
UKA 91.2 [90.9–91.4] | 5 | UKA 0.915 [0.882–0.939] | 26 | ||||||||||||
9–12 years of follow-up | HTO 79.9 [76.9, 82.8] | < 0.001 | 7 | UKA | 9–12 years of follow-up | HTO 0.844 [0.797–0.882] | 0.458 | 28 | n.s | ||||||
UKA 90.0 [89.7, 90.2] | 5 | UKA 0.869 [0.814–0.909] | 25 | ||||||||||||
After more than 12 years of follow-up | HTO 58.8 [47.6, 69.9] | 0.331 | 2 | n.s | More than 12 years of follow-up | HTO 0.701 [0.605–0.782] | 0.451 | 15 | n.s | ||||||
UKA 65.6 [57.4, 73.9] | 3 | UKA 0.775 [0.583–0.895] | 9 | ||||||||||||
Knee score from baseline to 5–8 years of follow-up | HTO SMD 5.0 [3.2–6.8] | 0.359 | 7 | n.s | Mean survival (Kaplan–Maier) | HTO 9.7 years [8.1–11.2] | 0.374 | 12 | n.s | ||||||
UKA SMD 4.1 [3.2–4.7] | 3 | UKA 8.2 years [5.5–11.0] | 5 | ||||||||||||
Knee score from baseline to 9–12 years of follow-up | HTO 1.7 [1.0, 2.3] | < 0.001 | 8 | UKA | |||||||||||
UKA 10.7 [10.2, 11.1] | 1 | ||||||||||||||
Score from baseline to more than 12 years of follow-up | HTO -0.2 [− 0.5, 0.1] | 0.603 | 1 | n.s | |||||||||||
UKA 1.2 [0.7, 1.6] | 1 | ||||||||||||||
Zhang et al. [16] | E/G result | OR 2.43 [1.46, 4.05] | 0.0006 | 6 | UKA | Revision rate | OR 0.47 [0.23–0.97] | 0.04 | 5 | UKA | Complication rate | OR 0.24 [0.10, 0.56] | 0.001 | 4 | UKA |
Gandhi et al. [20] | E/G result | OR 2.03 [1.16–3.6] | 0.013 | 6 | UKA | survival from aseptic loosening | OR 2.14 [0.93–4.93] | 0.074 | 5 | n.s | |||||
Velocity | SMD 0.389 [− 0.124–0.902] | 0.137 | 2 | n.s |
Methodological quality
Item no | 1 | 2 * | 3 | 4 * | 5 | 6 | 7 * | 8 | 9 * | 10 | 11* | 12 | 13* | 14 | 15* | 16 | Overall rating |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Migliorini et al. [7] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | × | × | √ | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | Low |
Bai et al. [35] | √ | × | × | P | × | × | × | √ | √ | × | √ | × | × | √ | × | √ | Critically low |
Huang et al. [17] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | × | √ | Low |
Cao et al. [3] | √ | √ | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate |
Santoso et al. [5] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate |
Han et al. [19] | √ | √ | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate |
Fu et al. [21] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate |
Spahn et al. [6] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | P | × | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | × | × | Critically low |
Zhang et al. [16] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate |
Gandhi et al. [20] | √ | × | × | P | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | × | √ | √ | √ | √ | × | √ | Low |