Is Patient-Specific Instrumentation Accurate and Necessary for Open-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy? A Meta-Analysis
- PMID: 36585795
- PMCID: PMC9891955
- DOI: 10.1111/os.13483
Is Patient-Specific Instrumentation Accurate and Necessary for Open-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy? A Meta-Analysis
Abstract
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to identify if patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) could increase the accuracy of the correction in high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and to explore the assessment indices and the necessity of using a PSI in HTO. A systematic search was carried out using online databases. A total of 466 patients were included in 11 papers that matched the inclusion criteria. To evaluate the accuracy of PSI-assisted HTO, the weight bearing line ratio (WBL%), hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (mMPTA), and posterior tibial slope angle (PTSA) were measured preoperatively and postoperatively and compared to the designed target values. Statistical analysis was performed after strict data extraction with Review Manager (version 5.4). Significant differences were detected in WBL% (MD = -36.41; 95% CI: -42.30 to -30.53; p < 0.00001), HKA (MD = -9.95; 95% CI: -11.65 to -8.25; p < 0.00001), and mMPTA (MD = -8.40; 95% CI:-10.27 to -6.53; p < 0.00001) but not in PTSA (MD = 0.34; 95% CI: -0.59 to 1.27; p = 0.47) between preoperative and postoperative measurements. There was no significant difference between the designed target values and the postoperative correction values of HKA (MD = 0.14; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.47; p = 0.41) or mMPTA (MD = 0.11; 95% CI -0.34 to 0.55; p = 0.64). The data show that 3D-based planning of PSI for HTO is both accurate and safe. WBL%, HKA, and mMPTA were the optimal evaluation indicators of coronal plane correction. Sagittal correction is best evaluated by the PTSA. The present study reports that PSI is accurate but not necessary in typical HTO.
Keywords: High tibial osteotomy; Meta-analysis; Osteoarthritis; Patient-specific cutting guides; Patient-specific instrumentation; Three-dimensional.
© 2022 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
All authors certify that he or she has no funding or commercial associations that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
Figures







References
-
- Rossi R, Bonasia DE, Amendola A. The role of high tibial osteotomy in the varus knee. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19(10):590–9. - PubMed
-
- Bode G, von Heyden J, Pestka J, Schmal H, Salzmann G, Südkamp N, et al. Prospective 5‐year survival rate data following open‐wedge valgus high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(7):1949–55. - PubMed
-
- Ferner F, Lutter C, Dickschas J, Strecker W. Medial open wedge vs. lateral closed wedge high tibial osteotomy ‐ indications based on the findings of patellar height, leg length, torsional correction and clinical outcome in one hundred cases. Int Orthop. 2019;43(6):1379–86. - PubMed
-
- Saragaglia D, Chedal‐Bornu B, Rouchy RC, Rubens‐Duval B, Mader R, Pailhé R. Role of computer‐assisted surgery in osteotomies around the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(11):3387–95. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources