Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Feb;36(2):767-776.e2.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.07.086. Epub 2020 Aug 8.

Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Medial Stabilized Versus Non-Medial Stabilized Prostheses in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Reece Tso  1 , Justin Smith  2 , Kenji Doma  3 , Andrea Grant  4 , Peter McEwen  5
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Medial Stabilized Versus Non-Medial Stabilized Prostheses in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Reece Tso et al. J Arthroplasty. 2021 Feb.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of medial stabilized total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with non-medial stabilized TKAs.

Methods: A systematic search of multiple databases was conducted in October 2019. A meta-analysis was conducted for the Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Society Functional Score (KFS), range of motion (ROM), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS).

Results: A total of 857 articles yielded 21 studies eligible for inclusion with 13 studies used for quantitative analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that the medial stabilized group had a mean FJS that was 13.8 points higher than that of the non-medial stabilized TKA (mean difference [MD]: 13.83, P ≤ .0001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.90-18.76, I2 = 0%) which was less than the minimal clinically important difference of 14. The medial stabilized group also demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the postoperative ROM (MD = 2.52, P = .05, 95% CI: -0.03 to 5.07, I2 = 85%) and OKS when compared with the non-medial stabilized group (MD = 1.25, P = .02, 95% CI: 0.17-2.33, I2 = 27%), but these were not clinically significant. There was no statistically or clinically significant difference in the KSS, KFS, and WOMAC scores.

Conclusion: Medial stabilized knee prostheses demonstrated no clinically significant differences for the ROM, OKS, WOMAC, KSS, and KFS. The FJS demonstrated the greatest MD and warrants further investigation. Future research is required using patient-reported outcome measures with a lower ceiling effect such as the FJS.

Keywords: Forgotten Joint Score (FJS); medial stabilized knee (MS); non–medial stabilized knee (NMS); patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs); range of motion (ROM); total knee arthroplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources