Comparison of the quadriceps-sparing and subvastus approaches versus the standard parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Research Article

Jiaxing Wang¹  Tao Cheng¹  Mengqi Cheng¹  Xianlong Zhang¹  Xiaochun Peng¹ 

[1] Department of Orthopaedics, The Sixth Affiliated People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Yishan Road, 200233, Shanghai, China;

关键词: Total knee arthroplasty;    Standard parapatellar;    Quadriceps-sparing;    Subvastus;    Meta-analysis;    Randomized controlled trial;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12891-015-0783-z

 received in 2015-02-10, accepted in 2015-10-02,  发布年份 2015

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe quadriceps-sparing and subvastus approaches are two of the most commonly used minimally-invasive approaches in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the conclusion among studies still remains controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy of the subvastus and quadriceps-sparing approaches with the standard parapatellar approach in TKA.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the quadriceps-sparing or subvastus approach with the standard parapatellar approach was identified in the databases of PubMed, the Cochrane library, EMBASE and Web of Science up to July 2014. Two authors extracted the following data: the basic characteristics of patients, the methodological quality and clinical outcomes from the included RCTs independently. RevMan 5.2.7 software was used for meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 19 RCTs (1578 patients) were included for meta-analysis. The results suggested that the quadriceps-sparing approach showed better outcomes in knee society score (KSS) and visual analog score (VAS), but this approach required a longer operative time than the standard parapatellar approach. There were no differences in total complications, wound infection, deep vein thrombosis, blood loss and hospital stay between the quadriceps-sparing and standard approaches. The subvastus approach showed better outcomes in VAS, knee range of motion (ROM), straight leg raise and lateral retinacular release than the standard parapatellar approach. There were no differences in KSS, total complication, wound infection, deep vein thrombosis, blood loss and hospital stay between the quadriceps-sparing and standard approaches.ConclusionsThe current evidence showed that, when compared with the standard parapatellar approach, the quadriceps-sparing approach was associated with better outcomes in KSS and VAS but required a longer operative time, and the subvastus approach was associated with better outcomes in VAS, ROM, straight leg raise and lateral retinacular release.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Peng et al. 2015