Mehmet Okan Atahan, Fatih Gölgelioğlu, Mustafa Yalın, Mehmet Cihat Gündoğdu, Mehmet Fatih Uzun, Ahmet Güney
{"title":"内翻畸形矫正对临床疗效的影响:腓骨近端截骨术与胫骨高位截骨术治疗膝骨性关节炎的比较研究。","authors":"Mehmet Okan Atahan, Fatih Gölgelioğlu, Mustafa Yalın, Mehmet Cihat Gündoğdu, Mehmet Fatih Uzun, Ahmet Güney","doi":"10.1007/s43465-025-01348-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proximal fibular osteotomy (PFO) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO) are two surgical options for treating varus deformities in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). While HTO provides more extensive correction, PFO offers a less invasive alternative. This study compares the radiologic and clinical outcomes of PFO and HTO to evaluate their relative efficacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted with 120 patients, 60 undergoing PFO and 60 undergoing HTO, across two centers. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Knee Society Score (KSS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, while radiological outcomes were evaluated by measuring the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. The complication rates were recorded, and multivariate regression analysis was performed to examine the factors influencing varus correction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups showed significant improvements in pain and function, with no major differences in clinical outcomes between PFO and HTO (<i>p</i> > 0.05). However, HTO provided greater correction of the varus deformity (10.5 ± 1.5° vs. 3.1 ± 1.6°, <i>p</i> = 0.010). A higher proportion of PFO patients exhibited residual varus (> 3°) compared to those who underwent HTO (50% vs. 10%, <i>p</i> = 0.003). Complication rates were higher in the HTO group, with non-union and tibial hinge fractures occurring in 7% and 8% of patients, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PFO is a less invasive option with fewer complications but provides less varus correction than HTO. Despite this, both techniques yield comparable clinical outcomes, indicating that PFO may be a viable alternative for patients with milder deformities or higher surgical risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":13338,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","volume":"59 4","pages":"530-538"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12014979/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Influence of Varus Deformity Correction on Clinical Outcomes: a Comparative Study of Proximal Fibular Osteotomy and High Tibial Osteotomy in Knee Osteoarthritis.\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Okan Atahan, Fatih Gölgelioğlu, Mustafa Yalın, Mehmet Cihat Gündoğdu, Mehmet Fatih Uzun, Ahmet Güney\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43465-025-01348-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proximal fibular osteotomy (PFO) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO) are two surgical options for treating varus deformities in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). While HTO provides more extensive correction, PFO offers a less invasive alternative. This study compares the radiologic and clinical outcomes of PFO and HTO to evaluate their relative efficacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted with 120 patients, 60 undergoing PFO and 60 undergoing HTO, across two centers. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Knee Society Score (KSS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, while radiological outcomes were evaluated by measuring the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. The complication rates were recorded, and multivariate regression analysis was performed to examine the factors influencing varus correction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups showed significant improvements in pain and function, with no major differences in clinical outcomes between PFO and HTO (<i>p</i> > 0.05). However, HTO provided greater correction of the varus deformity (10.5 ± 1.5° vs. 3.1 ± 1.6°, <i>p</i> = 0.010). A higher proportion of PFO patients exhibited residual varus (> 3°) compared to those who underwent HTO (50% vs. 10%, <i>p</i> = 0.003). Complication rates were higher in the HTO group, with non-union and tibial hinge fractures occurring in 7% and 8% of patients, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PFO is a less invasive option with fewer complications but provides less varus correction than HTO. Despite this, both techniques yield comparable clinical outcomes, indicating that PFO may be a viable alternative for patients with milder deformities or higher surgical risk.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics\",\"volume\":\"59 4\",\"pages\":\"530-538\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12014979/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-025-01348-y\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-025-01348-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:腓骨近端截骨术(PFO)和胫骨高位截骨术(HTO)是治疗膝骨关节炎(KOA)内翻畸形的两种手术选择。虽然HTO提供更广泛的矫正,但PFO提供了侵入性较小的替代方案。本研究比较了PFO和HTO的放射学和临床结果,以评估它们的相对疗效。方法:对两个中心的120例患者进行回顾性研究,其中60例接受PFO, 60例接受HTO。临床结果采用膝关节社会评分(KSS)和视觉模拟评分(VAS)来评估疼痛,放射学结果通过测量髋关节-膝关节-踝关节(HKA)角度来评估。记录并发症发生率,并进行多因素回归分析,探讨影响内翻矫正的因素。结果:两组患者疼痛和功能均有明显改善,PFO组与HTO组临床结果无显著差异(p < 0.05)。然而,HTO对内翻畸形的矫正效果更好(10.5±1.5°比3.1±1.6°,p = 0.010)。与HTO患者相比,PFO患者出现残留内翻(bbb3°)的比例更高(50% vs. 10%, p = 0.003)。HTO组的并发症发生率更高,不愈合和胫骨铰链骨折发生率分别为7%和8%。结论:与HTO相比,PFO是一种侵入性较小的选择,并发症较少,但内翻矫正效果较差。尽管如此,两种技术的临床结果相当,表明PFO可能是轻度畸形或手术风险较高的患者的可行选择。
The Influence of Varus Deformity Correction on Clinical Outcomes: a Comparative Study of Proximal Fibular Osteotomy and High Tibial Osteotomy in Knee Osteoarthritis.
Background: Proximal fibular osteotomy (PFO) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO) are two surgical options for treating varus deformities in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). While HTO provides more extensive correction, PFO offers a less invasive alternative. This study compares the radiologic and clinical outcomes of PFO and HTO to evaluate their relative efficacy.
Methods: A retrospective study was conducted with 120 patients, 60 undergoing PFO and 60 undergoing HTO, across two centers. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Knee Society Score (KSS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, while radiological outcomes were evaluated by measuring the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. The complication rates were recorded, and multivariate regression analysis was performed to examine the factors influencing varus correction.
Results: Both groups showed significant improvements in pain and function, with no major differences in clinical outcomes between PFO and HTO (p > 0.05). However, HTO provided greater correction of the varus deformity (10.5 ± 1.5° vs. 3.1 ± 1.6°, p = 0.010). A higher proportion of PFO patients exhibited residual varus (> 3°) compared to those who underwent HTO (50% vs. 10%, p = 0.003). Complication rates were higher in the HTO group, with non-union and tibial hinge fractures occurring in 7% and 8% of patients, respectively.
Conclusion: PFO is a less invasive option with fewer complications but provides less varus correction than HTO. Despite this, both techniques yield comparable clinical outcomes, indicating that PFO may be a viable alternative for patients with milder deformities or higher surgical risk.
期刊介绍:
IJO welcomes articles that contribute to Orthopaedic knowledge from India and overseas. We publish articles dealing with clinical orthopaedics and basic research in orthopaedic surgery. Articles are accepted only for exclusive publication in the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics. Previously published articles, articles which are in peer-reviewed electronic publications in other journals, are not accepted by the Journal. Published articles and illustrations become the property of the Journal. The copyright remains with the journal. Studies must be carried out in accordance with World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.