Comparative Analysis of Implant Survival and Clinical Efficacy between Medial and Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Tao Zhang, Wenwen Li, Dan Wu, Jinghe Ying, Jianlong Chen, Sanjay Rastogi
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Implant Survival and Clinical Efficacy between Medial and Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Tao Zhang, Wenwen Li, Dan Wu, Jinghe Ying, Jianlong Chen, Sanjay Rastogi","doi":"10.1055/a-2693-0814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), encompassing both medial and lateral approaches, facilitates accelerated rehabilitation and enhances patient satisfaction in comparison to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the optimal surgical techniques and implant positioning continue to be topics of ongoing debate. This study compares the clinical efficacy and implant survival rates of medial and lateral UKA to inform clinical decision-making and optimize patient outcomes. A comprehensive literature search was performed across four major electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library), yielding peer-reviewed journal articles that met the inclusion criteria. Statistical analysis involved calculating standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Cochrane <i>Q</i> test and <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistic, with <i>p</i>-values reported accordingly. Data analysis was facilitated using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4. This meta-analysis of 15 studies (<i>n</i> = 36,006 UKA patients) found no significant differences in survival rates, postoperative pain, and function scores between medial and lateral UKA. Specifically, the long-term subgroup (>10 years) showed a non-significant higher survival rate for lateral UKA (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.73-1.32, <i>p</i> = 0.92, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 51%), while the short- and mid-term subgroup (<10 years) showed a non-significant higher survival rate for medial UKA (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.96-1.50, <i>p</i> = 0.12, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 73%). Additionally, the pooled SMD revealed no significant differences in postoperative pain (SMD: 0.08, 95% CI: -0.27 to 0.44) and functional scores (SMD: 0.23, 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.51) between the two groups. In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis found no substantial disparities in clinical outcomes, survival rates, functional improvement, or pain alleviation between medial and lateral UKAs, confirming both as viable options.</p>","PeriodicalId":48798,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Knee Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Knee Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2693-0814","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), encompassing both medial and lateral approaches, facilitates accelerated rehabilitation and enhances patient satisfaction in comparison to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the optimal surgical techniques and implant positioning continue to be topics of ongoing debate. This study compares the clinical efficacy and implant survival rates of medial and lateral UKA to inform clinical decision-making and optimize patient outcomes. A comprehensive literature search was performed across four major electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library), yielding peer-reviewed journal articles that met the inclusion criteria. Statistical analysis involved calculating standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Cochrane Q test and I 2 statistic, with p-values reported accordingly. Data analysis was facilitated using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4. This meta-analysis of 15 studies (n = 36,006 UKA patients) found no significant differences in survival rates, postoperative pain, and function scores between medial and lateral UKA. Specifically, the long-term subgroup (>10 years) showed a non-significant higher survival rate for lateral UKA (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.73-1.32, p = 0.92, I 2 = 51%), while the short- and mid-term subgroup (<10 years) showed a non-significant higher survival rate for medial UKA (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.96-1.50, p = 0.12, I 2 = 73%). Additionally, the pooled SMD revealed no significant differences in postoperative pain (SMD: 0.08, 95% CI: -0.27 to 0.44) and functional scores (SMD: 0.23, 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.51) between the two groups. In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis found no substantial disparities in clinical outcomes, survival rates, functional improvement, or pain alleviation between medial and lateral UKAs, confirming both as viable options.

内外侧单腔膝关节置换术与内外侧单腔膝关节置换术植入物存活及临床疗效的比较分析:一项系统综述和meta分析。
单室膝关节置换术(UKA),包括内侧和外侧入路,与全膝关节置换术(TKA)相比,有助于加速康复并提高患者满意度。然而,最佳的手术技术和植入物的定位仍然是持续争论的话题。本研究比较了内侧和外侧单室膝关节置换术(UKA)的临床疗效和植入物存活率,为临床决策提供依据并优化患者预后。在四个主要的电子数据库(PubMed、EMBASE、Scopus和Cochrane Library)中进行了全面的文献检索,获得了符合纳入标准的同行评审期刊文章。统计分析包括计算标准化平均差异(SMD)和比值比(OR)以及相应的95%置信区间。采用Cochrane Q检验和I²统计量评估异质性,并报告相应的p值。使用Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4版本进行数据分析。这项荟萃分析了15项研究(n = 36006名UKA患者),发现内侧和外侧UKA在生存率、术后疼痛和功能评分方面没有显著差异。具体而言,长期亚组(> - 10年)显示外侧UKA的生存率无显著性提高(OR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.73-1.32, p = 0.92, I²= 51%),而中短期亚组(
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: The Journal of Knee Surgery covers a range of issues relating to the orthopaedic techniques of arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and reconstructive surgery of the knee joint. In addition to original peer-review articles, this periodical provides details on emerging surgical techniques, as well as reviews and special focus sections. Topics of interest include cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction, bone grafting, cartilage regeneration, and magnetic resonance imaging.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信