It is unclear whether open- or closed-wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO) results in significant changes in posterior tibial slope, with no consensus on the magnitude of such changes. Furthermore, methods of measuring posterior tibial slope differ among studies. This meta-analysis was therefore designed to evaluate whether posterior tibial slope increases after open-wedge HTO and decreases after closed-wedge HTO and to quantify the magnitudes of the slope changes after open- and closed-wedge HTO using various methods of measuring posterior tibial slope. Posterior tibial slope increases after open-wedge and decreases after closed-wedge HTO. The magnitude of change is similar for the 2 methods, and the value obtained for posterior tibial slope change is affected by the method of measurement. Meta-analysis. Multiple comprehensive databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed, were searched for studies that evaluated the posterior slope of the proximal tibia in patients who had undergone open- and/or closed-wedge HTO. Studies were included that compared pre- and postoperative posterior tibial slopes, regardless of measurement method, including anterior and posterior tibial cortex or tibial shaft axis as a reference line, in patients who underwent open- or closed-wedge HTO. The quality of each included study was appraised with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Twenty-seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled data, which included subgroups of 3 methods, showed that posterior tibial slope increased 2.02° (95% CI, 2.66° to 1.38°; P = .005) after open-wedge HTO and decreased 2.35° (95% CI, 1.38° to 3.32°; P < .001) after closed-wedge HTO. This meta-analysis confirmed that posterior tibial slope increased after open-wedge HTO and decreased after closed-wedge HTO when the results of a variety of measurement methods were pooled. The magnitude of change after open- and closed-wedge HTO was similar and small (approximately 2°), suggesting that both osteotomy techniques may have little effect on the biomechanics of the cruciate ligaments.

Jae-Gyoon Kim, Seung-Woo Han, and Dae-Hee Lee. Knee Surgery & Related Research 2016;28:255-62. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.16.050

This meta-analysis was designed to compare the longevity of the survivorship of opening versus closing wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO). All studies reporting survival rates in patients who underwent open or closed wedge HTO with more than 5-year follow-up duration were included in the meta-analysis. Survival time was considered as time to conversion to TKA. Twenty three studies were included in meta-analysis, 20 of which were of level IV evidence. The pooled 5-year survival rates were 95.1% (95% CI: 93.1 to 97.1%) in open wedge HTO and 93.9% (95% CI: 93.1 to 94.6%) in closed wedge HTO. Although there was 1.2% greater survival rate in open wedge HTO than in closed wedge HTO, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.419). Pooled 10-year survival rates were 91.6% (95% CI: 88.5 to 94.8%) in open wedge HTO and 85.4% (95% CI: 84.0 to 86.7%) in closed wedge HTO, indicating that open wedge HTO had 6.2% greater survival rate 10 years after surgery than did closed wedge HTO (P = 0.002). No difference in 5-year survivorship was found between open- and closed-wedge HTO. However, the survival rate was higher in open-wedge HTOs than in closed wedge HTO at 10 years.

Background: Given the superiority of meniscal repair over partial meniscectomy according to biomechanical data, the clinical outcomes of meniscal repair are likely to be better than those of partial meniscectomy for a medial meniscus root tear (MMRT). Purpose/Hypothesis: This review was designed to compare the clinical and radiological results between meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy for MMRTs. It was hypothesized that meniscal repair would result in better clinical and radiological results compared with partial meniscectomy. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Studies were included in the review if they (1) included patients with MMRTs who underwent primary arthroscopic meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy and (2) analyzed validated patient-reported outcomes and/or radiological evaluations. Summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated to compare partial meniscectomy with meniscal repair for each outcome. Results: A total of 13 studies were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 33.5 and 47.2 months in the meniscal repair group and partial meniscectomy group, respectively. The change in the Lysholm score from preoperatively to postoperatively was statistically significantly in favor of meniscal repair (OR, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.55-3.12]), while no difference was found with respect to the change in the Tegner score between the 2 surgical approaches (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.65-2.24]). The prevalence of postoperative severe knee osteoarthritis (OR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.17-0.54]) as well as that of reoperations (OR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.19]) were significantly in favor of meniscal repair. Conclusion: Better outcomes were seen after meniscal repair compared with partial meniscectomy for MMRTs, with greater improvements in Lysholm scores, and lower rates of progression to knee osteoarthritis, and lower reoperation rate.