4.2 Article

Medial Compartment Decompression by Fibular Osteotomy to Treat Medial Compartment Knee Osteoarthritis: A Pilot Study

期刊

ORTHOPEDICS
卷 38, 期 12, 页码 E1110-E1114

出版社

SLACK INC
DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20151120-08

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Compared with high tibial osteotomy and total knee arthroplasty, the authors found a simpler surgical procedure, partial fibular osteotomy, could effectively relieve knee pain and also correct the varus deformity for patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA). From January 1996 to April 2012, a total of 156 patients with medial compartment OA were treated by proximal fibular osteotomy in the authors' hospital. A 2-cm-long section of fibula was resected 6 to 10 cm below the fibular head. A total of 110 patients with follow-up of more than 2 years were included in the study, including 34 males and 76 females with an average age of 59.2 years. Anteroposterior and lateral weight-bearing radiographs, the femorotibial angle (FTA) and lateral joint space, and the American Knee Society Score (KSS) and the visual analog scale (VAS) score of the knee joint were evaluated preoperatively and at final followup, respectively. At final follow-up, mean FTA and lateral joint space were 179.4 degrees +/- 1.8 degrees and 6.9 +/- 0.7 mm, respectively, which were significantly smaller than those measured preoperatively (182.7 degrees +/- 2.0 degrees and 12.2 +/- 1.1 mm, respectively; both P<.001). Mean KSS at final follow-up was 92.3 +/- 31.7, significantly higher than the mean preoperative score of 45.0 +/- 21.3 (P<.001). Mean VAS score and interquartile range were 2.0 and 2.0, significantly lower than the preoperative data (7 and 1.0, respectively; P<.001). The authors found that proximal fibular osteotomy can significantly improve both the radiographic appearance and function of the affected knee joint and also achieve long-term pain relief. This procedure may be an alternative treatment option for medial compartment OA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据