Comparison of the clinical efficacy of patellar lateral retraction and patellar eversion in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Mingjie Dong, Xiaoyu Sun, Hao Fan, Weiping Ren, Yushan Wang, Yingjie Gao, Pengfei Shao, Yu Gao, Qiang Jiao, Yi Feng
{"title":"Comparison of the clinical efficacy of patellar lateral retraction and patellar eversion in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mingjie Dong, Xiaoyu Sun, Hao Fan, Weiping Ren, Yushan Wang, Yingjie Gao, Pengfei Shao, Yu Gao, Qiang Jiao, Yi Feng","doi":"10.1186/s12891-025-08532-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>According to the mobilization technique of the intraoperative patella, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be categorized into patellar eversion (PE) and patellar lateral retraction (PLR). Comparisons between the two procedures are inconclusive; therefore, the study purpose was to assess the postoperative clinical efficacy to identify the most suitable procedure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases were searched, including Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Embase, OVID, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CNKI, and WANFANG, to identify clinical trials of PLR versus PE from inception to May 2023. The statistical software Stata 15.0 and Review Manager 5.4 were applied to the data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen studies evaluating a total of 1349 patients and 1409 knees were ultimately included. Statistically significant differences emerged between the PLR and PE groups with respect to blood loss (P = 0.02), incision length (P < 0.001), operation time (P = 0.01), straight leg raise (P < 0.001), knee range of motion (ROM; P < 0.05), the Knee Society Score (KSS) functional score (P = 0.0003), the visual analogue scale (VAS) score (1 and 3 months, both P < 0.05), and operative complications (P = 0.02). Furthermore, the PLR and PE groups had similar clinical efficacy in terms of quadriceps strength, VAS score (1 week and 1 year), Hospital for Special Surgery score, KSS pain score, Insall-Salvati ratio, and the occurrence of patella baja (all P ≥ 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The PLR procedure is superior to PE in terms of blood loss, incision length, straight leg raise, knee ROM, VAS score (1 and 3 months), KSS functional score, and operative complications, although PE could decrease the operation time. PLR could achieve better postoperative clinical outcomes than could PE. Therefore, it is recommended that experienced surgeons prioritize PLR in TKA.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>This study was registered in the PROSPERO international registry (Registration ID: CRD42023440722).</p>","PeriodicalId":9189,"journal":{"name":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","volume":"26 1","pages":"279"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11924621/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-025-08532-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: According to the mobilization technique of the intraoperative patella, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be categorized into patellar eversion (PE) and patellar lateral retraction (PLR). Comparisons between the two procedures are inconclusive; therefore, the study purpose was to assess the postoperative clinical efficacy to identify the most suitable procedure.

Methods: Electronic databases were searched, including Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Embase, OVID, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CNKI, and WANFANG, to identify clinical trials of PLR versus PE from inception to May 2023. The statistical software Stata 15.0 and Review Manager 5.4 were applied to the data analysis.

Results: Fifteen studies evaluating a total of 1349 patients and 1409 knees were ultimately included. Statistically significant differences emerged between the PLR and PE groups with respect to blood loss (P = 0.02), incision length (P < 0.001), operation time (P = 0.01), straight leg raise (P < 0.001), knee range of motion (ROM; P < 0.05), the Knee Society Score (KSS) functional score (P = 0.0003), the visual analogue scale (VAS) score (1 and 3 months, both P < 0.05), and operative complications (P = 0.02). Furthermore, the PLR and PE groups had similar clinical efficacy in terms of quadriceps strength, VAS score (1 week and 1 year), Hospital for Special Surgery score, KSS pain score, Insall-Salvati ratio, and the occurrence of patella baja (all P ≥ 0.05).

Conclusions: The PLR procedure is superior to PE in terms of blood loss, incision length, straight leg raise, knee ROM, VAS score (1 and 3 months), KSS functional score, and operative complications, although PE could decrease the operation time. PLR could achieve better postoperative clinical outcomes than could PE. Therefore, it is recommended that experienced surgeons prioritize PLR in TKA.

Registration: This study was registered in the PROSPERO international registry (Registration ID: CRD42023440722).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1017
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The scope of the Journal covers research into rheumatic diseases where the primary focus relates specifically to a component(s) of the musculoskeletal system.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信