Mid-term survival analysis of closed wedge high tibial osteotomy: A comparative study of computer-assisted and conventional techniques.

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results and survival rates between computer-assisted and conventional closing wedge high tibial osteotomies (HTOs).

METHODS

Data from a consecutive cohort comprised of 75 computer-assisted HTOs and 75 conventional HTOs were retrospectively reviewed. The Knee Society knee and function scores, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score and femorotibial angle (FTA) were compared between the two groups. Survival rates were also compared with procedure failure.

RESULTS

The knee and function scores at one year postoperatively were slightly better in the computer-assisted group than those in conventional group (90.1 vs. 86.1) (82.0 vs. 76.0). The HSS scores at one year postoperatively were slightly better for the computer-assisted HTOs than those of conventional HTOs (89.5 vs. 81.8). The inlier of the postoperative FTA was wider in the computer-assisted group than that in the conventional HTO group (88.0% vs. 58.7%), and mean postoperative FTA was greater in the computer-assisted group that in the conventional HTO group (valgus 9.0° vs. valgus 7.6°, p<0.001). The five- and 10-year survival rates were 97.1% and 89.6%, respectively. No difference was detected in nine-year survival rates (p=0.369) between the two groups, although the clinical and radiographic results were better in the computer-assisted group that those in the conventional HTO group.

CONCLUSIONS

Mid-term survival rates did not differ between computer-assisted and conventional HTOs. A comparative analysis of longer-term survival rate is required to demonstrate the long-term benefit of computer-assisted HTO.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.