| Literature DB >> 31484580 |
Takashi Higuchi1, Hironobu Koseki2,3, Akihiko Yonekura4, Ko Chiba4, Yusuke Nakazoe5, Shinya Sunagawa1, Chieko Noguchi4, Makoto Osaki4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare radiological features between high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and tibial condylar valgus osteotomy (TCVO), in order to define the radiological indication criteria for TCVO.Entities:
Keywords: High tibial osteotomy; Knee osteoarthritis; Tibial condylar valgus osteotomy
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31484580 PMCID: PMC6727502 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-2764-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Characteristics of subjects
| HTO group | TCVO group | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 58.3 ± 8.4 | 58.4 ± 8.1 |
| Sex (cases/knees) | ||
| Men | 17 / 19 | 16 / 17 |
| Women | 15 / 16 | 16 / 18 |
| Side (knees) | ||
| Right | 18 | 15 |
| Left | 17 | 20 |
| Hight (cm) | 161.3 ± 9.4 | 159.1 ± 8.5 |
| Weight (kg) | 72.8 ± 15.8 | 70.8 ± 13.8 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 27.9 ± 5.3 | 27.8 ± 4.2 |
Fig. 1Anteroposterior radiographs of full-length legs in a standing position (a) before and (b) after TCVO. The L-shaped osteotomy is opened and fixed with TomoFix™ plate. The opened gap space was filled with granular β-TCP
Fig. 2a: Percentage of mechanical axis (%MA), b: femorotibial angle (FTA), and c: hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA angle) were measured to evaluate leg alignment
Fig. 3a: Mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA) and b: medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) were measured to evaluate the morphologies of the distal femur and proximal tibia
Fig. 4a: Medial tibial plateau depression (MTPD) and b: Posterior proximal tibial angle (PPTA) were measured to evaluate the morphology of the tibial plateau
Fig. 5Joint line convergence angle (JLCA) was measured to evaluate knee joint congruity
Fig. 6Varus and valgus stress angle. a: Varus and b: valgus stress were applied and the total amplitude of varus- and valgus-stress angle was identified as the laxity angle
Radiological parameters
| HTO group | TCVO group | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-op | Immediate | 1-year post-op | Pre-op | Immediate | 1-year post-op | |
| K/L grade (II/III/IV) | 19/15/1 | 4/21/10 b | ||||
| %MA | 20.0 ± 11.2 | 65.3 ± 8.6 a | 8.7 ± 13.3 b | 62.1 ± 7.9 a | ||
| FTA | 180.9 ± 3.7 | 169.2 ± 2.8 a | 183.4 ± 3.9 b | 170.5 ± 3.4 a | ||
| HKA | 172.9 ± 2.9 | 184.3 ± 2.2 a | 170.2 ± 3.2 b | 184.3 ± 3.1 a | ||
| mLDFA | 89.9 ± 1.2 | 89.2 ± 1.4 | 89.6 ± 1.7 | 88.5 ± 2.7 | ||
| MPTA | 84.0 ± 2.1 | 91.7 ± 3.4 a | 83.7 ± 2.3 | 92.5 ± 2.4 a | ||
| MTPD | −1.1 ± 2.2 | −0.9 ± 2.0 | −0.8 ± 2.5 | −7.4 ± 4.9 c | 6.0 ± 2.8 a,d | 5.5 ± 2.7 a,e |
| PPTA | 84.2 ± 2.5 | 82.7 ± 3.6 | 80.6 ± 4.1 a | 82.7 ± 3.2 c | 82.1 ± 4.1 | 81.2 ± 4.3 |
| JLCA | 1.4 ± 1.5 | 1.1 ± 1.0 | 5.1 ± 1.5 c | 0.7 ± 0.9 a | ||
| Varus stress angle | 5.1 ± 1.1 | 6.4 ± 2.1 a | 7.2 ± 1.7 b | 4.0 ± 2.1 a,e | ||
| Valgus stress angle | 1.9 ± 2.1 | 0.8 ± 1.8 a | 2.3 ± 2.8 | 0.5 ± 1.3 a | ||
| Laxity angle | 7.1 ± 2.3 | 7.1 ± 3.1 | 9.5 ± 3.2 c | 4.5 ± 2.4 a,e | ||
aP < 0.01 compared to pre-operatively
bP < 0.01 compared to pre-HTO
cP < 0.05 compared to pre-HTO
dP < 0.01 compared to immediately after HTO
eP < 0.05 compared to post-HTO