EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes between opening-wedge and closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy: A comprehensive meta-analysis

Lingfeng Wu, Jun Lin, Zhicheng Jin, Xiaobin Cai and Weiyang Gao

PLOS ONE, 2017, vol. 12, issue 2, 1-12

Abstract: High tibial osteotomy (HTO) has been widely used for clinical treatment of osteoarthritis of the medial compartment of the knee, and both opening-wedge and closing-wedge HTO are the most commonly used methods. However, it remains unclear which technique has better clinical and radiological outcomes in practice. To systematically evaluate this issue, we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis by pooling all available data for the opening-wedge HTO and closing-wedge HTO techniques from the electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Wed of Science and Cochrane Library. A total of 22 studies encompassing 2582 cases were finally enrolled in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference regarding surgery time, duration of hospitalization, knee pain VAS, Lysholm score and HSS knee score (clinical outcomes) between the opening-wedge and closing-wedge HTO groups (P > 0.05). However, the opening-wedge HTO group showed wider range of motion than the closing-wedge HTO group (P = 0.003). Moreover, as for Hip-Knee-Ankle angle and mean angle of correction, no significant difference was observed between the opening-wedge and closing-wedge HTO groups (P > 0.05), while the opening-wedge HTO group showed greater posterior tibial slope angle (P

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171700 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 71700&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0171700

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171700

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone (plosone@plos.org).

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171700