Table 3.
Result of the meta-analysis
| Outcome | Studies | Sample size | Effect estimate | P | Effect estimate | Heterogeneity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HTO | UKA | Odds ratio (95% CI) | STD (95% CI) | I 2 (%) | Chi2 (P) | |||
| Pain assesment (no/mild) | 5 | 194 | 155 | 0.34 [0.13, 0.91] | 0.03 | 61 | 0.08 | |
| Excellent/good (E/G) result | 10 | 353 | 317 | 0.37 [0.24, 0.58] | <0.00001 | 39 | 0.11 | |
| Excellent/good result (medial OA/varus) | 5 | 110 | 117 | 0.75 [0.37, 1.52] | 0.43 | 19 | 0.29 | |
| Subgroup: E/G CWHTO-UKA | 6 | 153 | 140 | 0.36 [0.21, 0.61] | 0.01 | 56 | 0.06 | |
| Subgroup: E/G OWHTO-UKA | 3 | 104 | 111 | 0.70 [0.26, 1.91] | 0.49 | 0 | 0.66 | |
| Knee score | 7 | 262 | 317 | 0.11 | −0.21 [−0.47, 0.05] | 51 | 0.05 | |
| Lysholm knee score | 3 | 92 | 126 | 0.08 | −0.53 [−1.12, 0.06] | 71 | 0.03 | |
| Knee Society Score (KSS) | 2 | 59 | 60 | 0.59 | 0.10 [−0.26, 0.46] | 0 | 0.88 | |
| Deterioration of contralateral | 2 | 107 | 92 | 2.24 [0.30, 16.72] | 0.43 | 74 | 0.05 | |
| Deterioration of patellofemoral | 2 | 107 | 92 | 2.01 [0.67, 6.04] | 0.21 | 0 | 0.57 | |
| ROM | 5 | 145 | 142 | 0.008 | 0.78 [0.21, 1.36] | 80 | 0.0005 | |
| Velocity | 3 | 51 | 51 | 0.66 | −0.09 [−0.48, 0.30] | 0 | 0.44 | |
| Complication | 7 | 305 | 307 | 3.08 [1.76, 5.39] | <0.0001 | 7 | 0.37 | |
| Revision rate | 11 | 880 | 5361 | 1.18 [0.54, 2.58] | 0.68 | 74 | <0.0001 | |
HTO high tibial osteotomy, UKA unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, P p value, E/G excellent, good result, OA osteoarthritis, Varus varus deformity, STD Std mean difference, CI confidence interval