8 39

Cited 3 times in

Cited 0 times in

Is unicompartmental knee arthroplasty a better choice than total knee arthroplasty for unicompartmental osteoarthritis? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Authors
 Xia, Kuanyu  ;  Min, Lang  ;  Xie, Wenqing  ;  Yang, Guang  ;  Yon, Dong Keon  ;  Lee, Seung Won  ;  Koyanagi, Ai  ;  Jacob, Louis  ;  Smith, Lee  ;  Shin, Jae Il  ;  Rahmati, Masoud  ;  Xiao, Wenfeng  ;  Li, Yusheng 
Citation
 CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL, Vol.138(13) : 1568-1577, 2025-07 
Journal Title
CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL
ISSN
 0366-6999 
Issue Date
2025-07
MeSH
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee* / methods ; Humans ; Osteoarthritis, Knee* / surgery ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Treatment Outcome
Keywords
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty ; Total knee arthroplasty ; Unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis ; Meta-analysis ; Systematic review
Abstract
Background: The choice of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) vs. total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) remains controversial. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the clinical results of UKA and TKA for treating unicompartmental KOA. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles published up to January 2, 2023. The literature was rigorously screened to include only RCTs comparing UKA and TKA for unicompartmental KOA. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to calculate the mean difference (MD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) according to the Cochrane standards. Results: Thirteen publications involving 683 UKAs and 683 TKAs were analyzed. Except for one study with a follow-up period of 15 years, all outcome measures reported were within 5 years of follow-up. Meta-analysis showed better knee recovery (MD: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.01-1.45; P <0.001), greater knee function (MD: 1.78; 95% CI: 0.34-3.22; P = 0.020), less pain (MD: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.43-1.06; P <0.001), and better health status (MD: 3.75; 95% CI: 0.81-6.69; P = 0.010) after UKA than TKA. However, considering the minimal clinically important difference values for these variables, the findings were not clinically relevant. Moreover, UKA patients had fewer complications (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.45-0.78; P <0.001) and shorter hospital stays (MD: -0.89; 95% CI: -1.57 to -0.22; P = 0.009) than did TKA patients. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of postoperative range of movement, revision, failure, operation time, and patient satisfaction. Conclusions: In terms of clinical efficacy, there was no obvious advantage of UKA over TKA in the surgical treatment of knee OA when considering the minimal clinically important difference. The main advantage of UKA over TKA is that it leads to fewer complications and a shorter length of hospital stay. It is ideal to perform prospective studies with longer follow-up periods to fully evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of the two procedures in the future.
Files in This Item:
89799.pdf Download
DOI
10.1097/CM9.0000000000003193
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Pediatrics (소아과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Shin, Jae Il(신재일) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2326-1820
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/207841
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links