To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Opening- vs closing-wedge osteotomy for medial compartment knee osteoarthritis

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
November 2014

Opening- vs closing-wedge osteotomy for medial compartment knee osteoarthritis

Vol: 3| Issue: 11| Number:70| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Comparison of Closing-Wedge and Opening-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy for Medial Compartment Osteoarthritis of the Knee A Randomized Controlled Trial with a Six-Year Follow-up

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 Sep 3;96(17):1425-32. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00786.

Contributing Authors:
T Duivenvoorden RW Brouwer A Baan PK Bos M Reijman SM Bierma-Zeinstra JA Verhaar

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

92 patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis were randomized to undergo opening- or closing-wedge osteotomy, with the purpose of comparing radiographic results, clinical outcomes, and survival rates between techniques 6 years post-surgery. There was no significant difference between groups with respect to radiographic or clinical outcomes. Opening-wedge osteotomy was associated with a g...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue