Background: Many clinical studies have been published in the literature to compare the outcomes of unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO), but reached different conclusions. Therefore, the relative merits and demerits of these 2 procedures remain under debate. The purpose of the present protocol was to design a retrospective comparative study to further investigate the clinical effectiveness of HTO compared to UKR in the medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis of knee patients.
Methods: This is an observational retrospective research, which prospectively collected the data from several surgeons in our center and utilized the above 2 methods to treat the unicompartmental osteoarthritis of knee. In our single hospital, we reviewed unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis patients treated using UKR or HTO from June 2016 to February 2018. For the HTO, its criteria included:For the UKR, its inclusion criteria containedIn our cohorts, the clinical investigations of the knee were composed of the objective parameters, which were recorded and then documented through utilizing the Function Score and Orthopedic American Knee Society Knee Score. The extra clinical findings evaluated involved operative time, postoperative requirements of blood transfusion, possible postoperative complications, as well as the range of motion.
Conclusion and discussion: The results of this study will provide clinical evidence on appropriate surgical treatment for patients with medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis.
Trial registration: This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry6152).