Comparison of the clinical efficacy of lateral versus medial unicondylar replacement for unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee: a meta-analysis.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research Pub Date : 2025-01-04 DOI:10.1186/s13018-024-05404-5
Haowei Bai, Pengyu Liu, Hao Li, Jiaju Yang, Zhitong Li, Qidong Guo, Min Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of the clinical efficacy of lateral versus medial unicondylar replacement for unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee: a meta-analysis.","authors":"Haowei Bai, Pengyu Liu, Hao Li, Jiaju Yang, Zhitong Li, Qidong Guo, Min Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05404-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This meta-analysis evaluates the comparative efficacy of lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA) versus medial UKA in treating unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (KOA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from January 2000 to September 2024. Literature screening, quality assessment, and data extraction were conducted based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Review Manager 5.4 software was used to analyze postoperative functional scores, pain scores, aseptic loosening, progression of contralateral arthritis, and prosthesis survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen cohort studies, encompassing 2,592 knees with medial UKA and 614 knees with lateral UKA, were included. The analysis showed no statistically significant differences in functional scores [SMD = 0.11, 95% CI (- 0.10, 0.33), I<sup>2</sup> = 64%, P = 0.31], pain scores [SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: (- 0.22, 0.67), I<sup>2</sup> = 91%, P = 0.32], aseptic loosening [OR = 1.33, 95% CI: (0.31, 5.78), I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P = 0.70], progression of contralateral arthritis [OR = 0.37, 95% CI: (0.07, 1.91), I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P = 0.23], short- to intermediate-term survival [OR = 1.40, 95% CI: (0.84, 2.35), I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P = 0.20], and long-term survival [OR = 1.12, 95% CI: (0.61, 2.05), I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P = 0.70].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate no significant differences in functional outcomes, pain relief, aseptic loosening, progression of contralateral arthritis, or prosthesis survival between lateral and medial UKA. Thus, both approaches are reliable options for patients with unicompartmental KOA.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11699812/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05404-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This meta-analysis evaluates the comparative efficacy of lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA) versus medial UKA in treating unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

Methods: We systematically searched Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from January 2000 to September 2024. Literature screening, quality assessment, and data extraction were conducted based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Review Manager 5.4 software was used to analyze postoperative functional scores, pain scores, aseptic loosening, progression of contralateral arthritis, and prosthesis survival.

Results: Fifteen cohort studies, encompassing 2,592 knees with medial UKA and 614 knees with lateral UKA, were included. The analysis showed no statistically significant differences in functional scores [SMD = 0.11, 95% CI (- 0.10, 0.33), I2 = 64%, P = 0.31], pain scores [SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: (- 0.22, 0.67), I2 = 91%, P = 0.32], aseptic loosening [OR = 1.33, 95% CI: (0.31, 5.78), I2 = 0%, P = 0.70], progression of contralateral arthritis [OR = 0.37, 95% CI: (0.07, 1.91), I2 = 0%, P = 0.23], short- to intermediate-term survival [OR = 1.40, 95% CI: (0.84, 2.35), I2 = 0%, P = 0.20], and long-term survival [OR = 1.12, 95% CI: (0.61, 2.05), I2 = 0%, P = 0.70].

Conclusion: Our findings indicate no significant differences in functional outcomes, pain relief, aseptic loosening, progression of contralateral arthritis, or prosthesis survival between lateral and medial UKA. Thus, both approaches are reliable options for patients with unicompartmental KOA.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外侧单髁置换术与内侧单髁置换术治疗单室膝关节骨性关节炎的临床疗效比较:荟萃分析。
目的:本荟萃分析评估外侧单室关节置换术(UKA)与内侧单室关节置换术(UKA)治疗单室膝骨关节炎(KOA)的比较疗效。方法:系统检索2000年1月至2024年9月的Cochrane、PubMed、Embase和Web of Science数据库。根据预定义的纳入和排除标准进行文献筛选、质量评估和数据提取。使用Review Manager 5.4软件分析术后功能评分、疼痛评分、无菌性松动、对侧关节炎进展和假体存活。结果:纳入了15项队列研究,包括2,592个膝关节内侧UKA和614个膝关节外侧UKA。分析显示在功能没有明显的统计学差异分数(SMD = 0.11, 95%可信区间(- 0.10,0.33),I2 = 64%, P = 0.31),疼痛评分(SMD = 0.23, 95%置信区间CI: (- 0.22, 0.67), I2 = 91%, P = 0.32),无菌性松动(OR = 1.33, 95% CI: (0.31, 5.78), I2 = 0%, P = 0.70),对侧的关节炎的进展(OR = 0.37, 95% CI: (0.07, 1.91), I2 = 0%, P = 0.23),短期中期生存(OR = 1.40, 95% CI:(0.84, 2.35), I2 = 0%, P = 0.20),长期生存(OR = 1.12, 95% CI: (0.61, 2.05), I2 = 0%, P = 0.70)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,在功能结局、疼痛缓解、无菌性松动、对侧关节炎进展或假体存活方面,外侧和内侧UKA之间没有显著差异。因此,这两种方法对于单室KOA患者都是可靠的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for mechanical complications in degenerative lumbar scoliosis with concomitant thoracolumbar kyphosis: does the selection of the upper instrumented vertebra matter? Current developments in robotic assistance technology for total knee arthroplasty: a comprehensive overview. Mechanism of hyperbaric oxygen therapy downregulating H-type angiogenesis in subchondral bone of knee osteoarthritis through the PHD2/HIF-1α pathway. Radiography may not be accurate in assessing acute ankle sprains in children. The patellar compression angle: a new, accurate diagnostic angle for lateral patellar compression syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1