A Systematic Review of Clinical Functional Outcomes After Medial Stabilized Versus Non-Medial Stabilized Total Knee Joint Replacement

Tony Young, Michelle M. Dowsey, Marcus Pandy, Peter F. Choong

Medial stabilized total knee joint replacement (TKJR) construct is designed to closely replicate the kinematics of the knee. Little is known regarding comparison of clinical functional outcomes of patients utilising validated patient reported outcome measures (PROM) after medial stabilized TKJR and other construct designs. To perform a systematic review of the available literature related to the assessment of clinical functional outcomes following a TKJR employing a medial stabilized construct design. The review was performed with a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) algorithm. The literature search was performed using variouscombinations of keywords. The statistical analysis was completed using Review Manager (RevMan), Version 5.3. In the nineteen unique studies identified, there were 2,448 medial stabilized TKJRs implanted in 2,195 participants, there were 1,777 TKJRs with non-medial stabilized design constructs implanted in 1,734 subjects. The final mean Knee Society Score (KSS) value in the medial stabilized group was 89.92 compared to 90.76 in the non-medial stabilized group, with the final KSS mean value difference between the two groups was statistically significant and favored the non-medial stabilized group (SMD 0.21; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.41; p = 004). The mean difference in the final WOMAC values between the two groups was also statistically significant and favored the medial stabilized group (SMD: -0.27; 95% CI: -0.47 to -0.07; p = 0.009). Moderate to high values (I2 ) of heterogeneity were observed during the statistical comparison of these functional outcomes. Based on the small number of studies with appropriate statistical analysis, we are unable to reach a clear conclusion in the clinical performance of medial stabilized knee replacement construct. Level II.