Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Consistent indications, targets and techniques for double-level osteotomy of the knee: a systematic review
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Consistent indications, targets and techniques for double-level osteotomy of the knee: a systematic review
Do you wish to request the book?
Consistent indications, targets and techniques for double-level osteotomy of the knee: a systematic review
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Consistent indications, targets and techniques for double-level osteotomy of the knee: a systematic review
2022
Overview
Purpose
To systematically review and critically appraise the literature on double-level osteotomy (DLO) of the knee, and determine the indications, contraindications, targets and outcomes.
Materials and methods
A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane for studies that reported on DLO by any technique or approach, including indications, contraindications, and targets for DLO, as well as patient-reported outcome measures (pROMS) and radiographic angles.
Results
Twelve eligible studies were found: 9 case series and 3 studies that compared DLO to high-tibial osteotomy (HTO). In all studies, DLO was performed by medial opening-wedge tibial osteotomy and lateral closing-wedge femoral osteotomy. Seven specified that DLO was performed if simple HTO would exceed thresholds of postoperative medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and/or predicted wedge size. The targets were 88°–95° for MPTA, 84°–89° for LDFA, and 0°–4° for hip–knee–ankle (HKA) angle. The 3 comparative studies reported lower MPTA after DLO (89.6°–92.5°) than after HTO (91.5°–98.3°). All 3 reported similar postoperative HKA after DLO (0.2°–4.4°) as HTO (0.4°–4.8°); only 2 compared postoperative LDFA, which was lower after DLO (85.4° and 84.9°) than HTO (88.7° and 88.8°). Two comparative studies reported postoperative overall KOOS which was slightly lower after DLO (351–403) than HTO (368–410); only 1 study reported separate items of the KOOS.
Conclusion
There was relative consistency between studies on the indications, targets and techniques for DLO. Furthermore, while the comparative studies reported similar preoperative MPTA, LDFA and HKA, the postoperative MPTA and LDFA were lower after DLO than after HTO, though both treatments achieved equivalent postoperative HKA.
Level of evidence
IV, systematic review.
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg,John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Subject
