Abstract
Purpose
The first purpose of this study was to introduce an individualized, pathology-based approach for the amount of axis correction in valgus high tibial osteotomy (HTO), in which the weight-bearing line (WBL) is transferred in one of three adjacent 5 %-areas of the transverse diameter of the tibial plateau. The second purpose was to define the corresponding mechanical femorotibial angle (mFTA) for the margins of each 5 %-area.
Methods
Reported indications for valgus HTO were assorted to one of three groups, based on the underlying pathology and expected accompanying degree of osteoarthritis. Three adjacent 5 %-areas on the tibial plateau were defined, ranging from the 50 % to 65 % coordinate. The medial border of the tibial plateau was defined as 0 % and the lateral border was defined as 100 %. To define the corresponding mFTA, valgus HTO was simulated in 69 patients using commercial available planning software (mediCAD®, Hectec GmbH, Germany). The corresponding mFTA was recorded at four different positions (50 %, 55 %, 60 %, and 65 %).
Results
Within the purposed approach, the WBL is aimed in one of three 5 %-areas (50–55 %, 55–60 %, and 60–65 %) of the transverse diameter of the tibial plateau, according to the underlying pathology. Based on the findings of simulated HTO, the mean mFTA was 0.3° ± 0.2° at the 50 % position, 1.3° ± 0.2° at the 55 % position, 2.4° ± 0.3° at the 60 % position, and 3.4° ± 0.3° at the 65 % position. The mean difference of the mFTA between each adjacent valgus position was 1.1° ± 0.1°.
Conclusion
The present paper introduces an individualized approach to adopt the degree of valgus correction in dependence of the underlying pathology. The area of interest on the tibial plateau lies in between the 50 % and 65 % coordinate on the tibial plateau, or in between a mean mFTA of 0.3° and 3.4° of valgus, respectively. Differences of the resulting mFTA between each area are small, and therefore a precise surgical technique is mandatory.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Valgus high tibial osteotomy (HTO) is a well-established treatment option for medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) and varus malalignment in relatively young and active patients [6, 19, 22, 45, 47, 58, 63]. With improvements in surgical technique, the indications for HTO have evolved in recent years. Nowadays, HTO is also used on a routine base for a variety of different indications such as medial compartment overload, ligamentous insufficiency, and as a concomitant procedure in patients undergoing cartilage repair or meniscus transplantation [4, 5, 10, 11, 22, 25, 42, 57, 67].
Besides appropriate patient selection, precise surgical technique, and stable osteotomy fixation, postoperative alignment is one of the critical factors for long-term success of HTO [65]. Both, under- and overcorrection have been associated with poor outcomes after HTO [16, 30, 32, 36, 53, 60, 66]. To date, however, the ideal postoperative alignment is discussed controversially [7, 15, 21, 30, 48, 65]. In the case of medial compartment OA, most authors aim to align the weightbearing axis through the 62 % coordinate of the width of the tibial plateau [21, 22]. While this alignment may work well in patients with significant OA, less valgus position may be beneficial in patients with medial compartment overload or in the case of concomitant cartilage repair or meniscus transplantation [3, 7, 38]. Current concepts in HTO therefore include individualized alignment [22, 37, 38, 43, 65]; however, a comprehensive approach for different indications for HTO has not been published so far.
The first purpose of this study was to review the literature for different indications for valgus HTO and to develop an individualized approach for the amount of axis correction, in which the weightbearing line (WBL) is aimed at one of three adjacent 5 %-areas on the tibial plateau. The second purpose was to define the corresponding mechanical femorotibial angle (mFTA) for the margins of each area.
Methods
Development of an individualized, pathology-based approach for axis correction in valgus HTO
A non-systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify common indications for valgus HTO [4, 6, 8, 12, 17, 25, 38, 52, 57, 64]. Each identified indication was assorted to one of three groups (group 1–3) according to the underlying pathology and expected accompanying degree of OA. Based on the position of the WBL in relation to the width of the tibial plateau, three different areas for the target postoperative alignment were defined. Each of these areas measures 5 % of the total width of the tibial plateau, ranging from 50 to 65 % (Fig. 1). The medial border of the tibial plateau was defined as 0 %, and the lateral border was defined as 100 %. Percentage values were chosen to allow for osteotomy planning independent from the absolute knee size. The area between 50 and 65 % was chosen based on common correction values reported in the literature [6, 15, 16, 21, 22, 37, 41, 45, 48, 51, 57].
Computerized osteotomy simulation
Digital full single-leg weight-bearing anterior-posterior radiographs were obtained from 80 consecutive patients undergoing medial open-wedge HTO. Eleven radiographs were excluded because the patella was not exactly centred anteriorly. Therefore, 69 radiographs of 69 patients were available for osteotomy simulation. The mean age of the patients was 45 ± 11 years (range, 18–66 years). Seventy-five percent of the patients (n = 52) were male and 25 % (n = 17) were female. The right knee was involved in 57 % (n = 39) and the left knee was involved in 44 % (n = 30).
Osteotomy simulation was conducted by a single observer using a landmark-based planning software (mediCAD®, Hectec GmbH, Germany) (Fig. 2). This software allows for precise analysis of the alignment as well as simulation of single and multiple osteotomies with a high intra- and interrater reliability [28, 62]. Planning was done according to the user manual of the manufacturer. In brief, the digital radiographs were imported to the mediCAD® program and calibrated. All necessary landmarks were marked, including the centre of the femoral head, the apex of the greater trochanter, femoral and tibial knee base, medial and lateral border of the femoral condyles and tibial plateau, medial and lateral border of the talus, the joint line of the talus, and the anatomical shaft axis of the femur and tibia. Next, the osteotomy and the hinge point were marked. To achieve a standardized osteotomy in every patient, the osteotomy started at the medial site at 4 cm below the joint line and ended at the lateral cortex at 2 cm below the joint line. The hinge point was set at 90 % of the total medial-to-lateral length of the osteotomy. Subsequently, the osteotomy was simulated four times in each patient with the WBL crossing the tibial plateau at 50 %, 55 %, 60 %, and 65 %. The corresponding mFTA for each correction value was recorded.
Mean value, standard deviation, and range of the measured mFTA were calculated for each simulated valgus position.
Results
Development of an individualized, pathology-based approach for axis correction in valgus HTO
Identified indications for valgus HTO were varus malalignment combined with medial compartment OA, medial compartment overload, cartilage repair of the medial compartment, medial meniscus transplantation, and ligamentous insufficiency with or without OA [4, 6, 8, 12, 17, 25, 38, 52, 57, 64]. Table 1 shows the allocation of these indications to the three groups. The main characteristic feature of patients assorted to group 1 is that no radiographic signs of OA are present. In patients belonging to group 2, mild signs of OA are already present (grades 1 and 2 according to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification [34]), and patients of group 3 present with progressed OA (grades 3 and 4). The three defined 5 %-areas range from the 50 % coordinate to the 65 % coordinate of the transverse diameter of the tibial plateau (Fig. 1). For group 1, the WBL is aimed to cross the tibial plateau at the 50–55 % area, for group 2 at the 55–60 % area, and for group 3 at the 60–65 % area (Table 1).
Computerized osteotomy simulation
The mean pre-simulation mFTA was 5.5° ± 2.7° (range, 2.0–15.6°) of varus deviation. The corresponding values at each simulated valgus position are shown in Table 2 and Fig. 3. The 50–55 % area was bounded by a mean mFTA of 0.3° and 1.3° (range, −0.2 to 1.8°), the 55–60 % area by a mean mFTA of 1.3° and 2.4° (range, 0.9–3.0°), and the 60–65 % area by a mean mFTA of 2.4° and 3.4° (range, 1.9–4.1°). The mean difference of the mFTA was 1.1° ± 0.1° (range 0.8–1.2°) between the 50 % and 55 % position, 1.1° ± 0.1° (range, 0.9–1.5°) between the 55 % and 60 % position, and 1.1° ± 0.1° (range, 0.7–1.2°) between the 60 % and 65 % position. In other words, transferring the WBL to the adjacent 5 % area changes the mFTA by approximately one degree.
Discussion
The main purpose of the present study was to introduce an individualized, pathology-based approach for the amount of axis correction in valgus HTO, in which the WBL is transferred into one of three adjacent 5 %-areas of the transverse diameter of the tibial plateau The area between 50 and 65 % and the respective indications were chosen based on common correction values for different indications reported in the current literature [6, 15, 16, 21, 22, 37, 41, 45, 48, 51, 57]. Based on the findings of computerized osteotomy simulation, the 50–55 % area corresponds to a mean mFTA of 0.3–1.3° of valgus, the 55–60 % area corresponds to a mean mFTA of 1.3° and 2.4° of valgus, and the 60–65 % area corresponds to a mean mFTA of 2.4° and 3.4° of valgus. The mean difference of the mFTA between the margins of each 5 %-area was 1.1° ± 0.1°.
The ideal postoperative alignment for valgus HTO is unknown [7, 15, 21, 30, 48, 65]. Since the indications for valgus HTO have evolved, one uniform alignment most likely does not exist, and the postoperative alignment has to be customized to the patients needs [3, 7, 37, 38, 43, 65]. Current guidelines for postoperative alignment are mainly based on clinical experience, and only few biomechanical studies exist [3, 39, 56, 69]. Agneskirchner et al. [3] quantified the effect of different loading axes on tibiofemoral cartilage pressure in six cadaveric knees. By simulating a varus deformity (WBL at the 0 % coordinate), the medial compartment pressure exceeded that of the lateral compartment by approximately 45 %. Contrarily, at neutral alignment (WBL at the 50 % coordinate), the mean contact pressure of the lateral compartment exceeded the medial compartment pressure by 17 %, and at the 62 % coordinate by 35 %. Similarly, Riegger-Krugh et al. [56] found less medial average and maximum contact pressure than lateral contact pressure for neutral (0° of mechanical valgus) and valgus (5° of mechanical valgus) alignment. Both studies suggest that markedly overcorrection into valgus might not be necessary since even neutral mechanical alignment leads to decreased loading of the medial compartment. Mina et al. [39] examined the minimum alignment correction required for unloading a medial chondral defect. All examined specimens demonstrated complete unloading of the medial compartment between 6° and 10° of anatomic valgus. Equally distributed contact pressure between the medial and lateral compartment was found for alignments of 0° to 4° of anatomic valgus. Finally, Van Thiel et al. [69] evaluated the effect of valgus HTO in the context of medial meniscal transplantation. The authors did not find a significant difference in medial compartment peak pressure between 6° and 3° of mechanical varus, and between 3° of mechanical varus and neutral alignment for the intact, meniscectomized and transplanted state. However, there was a significant decrease in medial compartment peak pressure between neutral and 3° of mechanical valgus for all three states. No difference was found between 3° and 6° of mechanical valgus, and between 6° and 8° of mechanical valgus. The findings of this study, do not support a correction beyond 3° of mechanical valgus.
Since the rational for valgus HTO differs between different indications, a pathology-based approach for the amount of axis correction seems to be reasonable. In the case of progressed medial compartment OA, the aim of valgus HTO is to transfer the weight-bearing axis to the unaffected lateral compartment, in order to reduce pain and to delay the need for knee replacement [1, 6, 14, 30, 41]. The role of HTO in patients undergoing cartilage repair is to provide an optimal biomechanical environment for healing by decreasing the load of the operative site [8, 40, 52]. Higher failure rates after osteochondral allograft transplantation have been reported in patients with concomitant malalignment compared to patients without malalignment [24, 50]. Unloading of the medial compartment may therefore be beneficial in patients with varus malalignment undergoing cartilage repair of the medial compartment [10, 39, 42, 46, 59]. Good clinical results have been reported after valgus HTO combined with microfracture [67, 68], osteochondral autologous transfer [42], and autologous cartilage implantation [10, 20] of the medial femoral condyle. The basic principles for additional valgus HTO in the case of medial meniscus transplantation are the same as for cartilage repair [5, 11]. Overload due to malalignment may damage the graft over time, leading to failure [5]. Combined meniscal allograft transplantation and realignment osteotomy have been shown to produce good clinical results [13, 70]. The role of valgus HTO in knee instabilities is versatile. In the case of ligamentous deficiency combined with varus / hyperextension varus thrust, isolated ligament repair or reconstruction is prone to failure because of repetitive overloading of the soft tissue reconstruction [9, 35, 44, 48, 49]. Valgus HTO in these patients is performed to augment ligamentous reconstruction by redistributing the forces acting on the knee joint [4, 25, 54, 57]. Chronic ligamentous insufficiency is often associated with varus malalignment and medial compartment OA. The role of valgus HTO in these patients is mainly to unload the medial compartment. However, additional controlled alterations of the tibial slope during valgus HTO can be used to address symptoms of instability associated with ACL and PCL deficiency [17, 31]. Based on the findings of biomechanical studies, increasing the tibial slope seems to be beneficial in the case of PCL deficiency, whereas decreasing the tibial slope might be favourable in ACL deficient knees [2, 26, 27, 71]. Therefore, HTO may also be performed as a stabilizing procedure with or without concomitant ligament reconstruction [17, 25, 44, 57].
In order to allow for individualized deformity correction, different concepts have been described, which focus on the status of the articular cartilage [37, 43]. Marti et al. [37] planned the WBL through the 10 % position in the presence of a one-third loss of medial cartilage thickness, with 0 % being the centre of the knee joint and 100 % being the lateral border of the plateau. With two-thirds loss of medial cartilage thickness, the WBL was planned through the 20 % position, and with a total loss through the 30 % position of the lateral compartment. Müller and Strecker [43] described an approach in which the correction depends on the difference of chondromalacia (Outerbridge classification) between the medial and lateral compartment during arthroscopy prior to HTO. The maximum amount of correction to 5° of valgus was performed in patients with a difference of IV (grade IV chondromalacia of the medial compartment and grade 0 of the lateral compartment). A correction to 3.3° of valgus was performed in patients with a difference of III, and to 1.7° in patients with a difference of II [43].
The approach introduced within this article also respects the amount of OA, however, it also takes the underlying pathology into account. Our approach distinguishes three different groups of indications, which in our opinion need to be aligned differently. The main characteristic of patients belonging to group 1 is that no radiographic signs of OA are present. Valgus HTO in these patients is used as a combined procedure to augment biological reconstructive procedures such as ligament reconstruction, cartilage repair, and meniscal transplantation, or as a single procedure in patients with painful medial compartment overload. These patients are commonly younger compared to patients with medial compartment OA, and considerable overcorrection may negatively influence the clinical outcome by poor cosmesis and progressive deterioration of the lateral compartment [30, 32]. In accordance with other authors [22, 38, 39, 57], we therefore prefer correction to neutral or slightly valgus. In our clinical practice, the WBL in this group is aimed between the 50 % and 55 % coordinate. With regard to the findings of this study, this area corresponds to a mean mFTA between 0.3° and 1.3° of valgus. Group 2 consists of patients who present with varus malalignment and early stage medial compartment OA grade 1 or 2 according to the Kellgren and Lawrence classification (with or without instability) and patients with varus malalignment and focal cartilage defects of the medial femoral condyle and/or significant loss of the medial meniscus but also mild signs of OA. Cartilage repair or meniscal transplantation in the latter patients must be regarded as a critical indication, but may be performed as a salvage procedure [18, 61]. In this group we prefer to transfer the WBL more laterally compared to group 1, but not as far as for patients with progressed medial compartment OA. We therefore aim the WBL between the 55 % and 60 % coordinate, which corresponds to a mean mFTA between 1.3° and 2.4° of valgus. Group 3 consists of patients with varus malalignment and progressed medial compartment OA with or without instability. The common consent in these patients is that correction should be beyond neutral, however, the exact amount of valgus correction has to be determined [1, 14, 15, 21, 30, 43, 57]. In accordance with other authors [15, 21, 41, 48], we aim to align the WBL between the 60 % and 65 % coordinate. With regard to the findings of our study, this area lies in between a mean mFTA of 2.4° and 3.4° of valgus.
The amount of axis correction can be controlled intra-operatively by several methods including fluoroscopic simulation of the WBL with a wire cable or a long alignment rod. However, these methods have variable accuracy, since limb rotation can influence the measurement of lower limb alignment [33]. Computer navigation has been reported to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of axis correction during valgus HTO [23, 29, 55]. In the present study, the differences of the resulting mFTA between the margins of each 5 %-area were small, with a mean value of 1.1°. These data underline the importance of a precise surgical technique. Computer navigation might therefore be a valuable tool for precise individualized HTO.
One limitation of the present study is that the osteotomy simulation was not controlled by postoperative long leg X-rays. Further clinical studies are therefore necessary to proof the accuracy for the proposed approach. The main weakness of the present study is that the presented approach lacks evidence because of missing outcome data. However, the authors have extensive experience in the field of HTO, reflected by more than 20 related publications listed on PubMed®. This paper describes our current clinical practice for valgus HTO, which provides high patient satisfaction in our hands. We therefore believe that this “expert opinion” is of general interest for surgeons performing HTO, and might positively influence further research on the ideal alignment after valgus HTO. As stated by Andrew Amis, many of the accepted “rules” for HTO have little scientific evidence to show that they represent the best practice for long-term preservation of the knee joint [7]. Therefore, the introduced approach for individualized axis correction has to be confirmed in clinical studies in the future.
Conclusion
Transferring the WBL into one of three 5 %-areas on the tibial plateau according to the underlying pathology is an alternative method for individualized axis correction in valgus HTO. The 50–55 % area corresponds to a mean mFTA of 0.3–1.3° of valgus, the 55–60 % area corresponds to a mean mFTA of 1.3° and 2.4° of valgus, and the 60–65 % area corresponds to a mean mFTA of 2.4° and 3.4° of valgus. The mean difference of the resulting mFTA between the margins of each 5 %-area is small, and therefore a precise surgical technique is mandatory.
References
Aglietti P, Buzzi R, Vena LM, Baldini A, Mondaini A (2003) High tibial valgus osteotomy for medial gonarthrosis: a 10- to 21-year study. J Knee Surg 16(1):21–26
Agneskirchner JD, Hurschler C, Stukenborg-Colsman C, Imhoff AB, Lobenhoffer P (2004) Effect of high tibial flexion osteotomy on cartilage pressure and joint kinematics: a biomechanical study in human cadaveric knees. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124(9):575–584
Agneskirchner JD, Hurschler C, Wrann CD, Lobenhoffer P (2007) The effects of valgus medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy on articular cartilage pressure of the knee: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 23(8):852–861
Amendola A (2003) The role of osteotomy in the multiple ligament injured knee. Arthroscopy 19(Suppl 1):11–13
Amendola A (2007) Knee osteotomy and meniscal transplantation: indications, technical considerations, and results. Sports Med Arthrosc 15(1):32–38
Amendola A, Bonasia DE (2010) Results of high tibial osteotomy: review of the literature. Int Orthop 34(2):155–160
Amis AA (2013) Biomechanics of high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):197–205
Arnold MP, Hirschmann MT, Verdonk PC (2012) See the whole picture: knee preserving therapy needs more than surface repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(2):195–196
Arthur A, LaPrade RF, Agel J (2007) Proximal tibial opening wedge osteotomy as the initial treatment for chronic posterolateral corner deficiency in the varus knee: a prospective clinical study. Am J Sports Med 35(11):1844–1850
Bode G, Schmal H, Pestka JM, Ogon P, Sudkamp NP, Niemeyer P (2013) A non-randomized controlled clinical trial on autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) in cartilage defects of the medial femoral condyle with or without high tibial osteotomy in patients with varus deformity of less than 5 degrees. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133(1):43–49
Bonasia DE, Amendola A (2010) Combined medial meniscal transplantation and high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(7):870–873
Brinkman JM, Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD, Staubli AE, Wymenga AB, van Heerwaarden RJ (2008) Osteotomies around the knee: patient selection, stability of fixation and bone healing in high tibial osteotomies. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 90(12):1548–1557
Cameron JC, Saha S (1997) Meniscal allograft transplantation for unicompartmental arthritis of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 337:164–171
Coventry MB, Ilstrup DM, Wallrichs SL (1993) Proximal tibial osteotomy. A critical long-term study of eighty-seven cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75(2):196–201
Dugdale TW, Noyes FR, Styer D (1992) Preoperative planning for high tibial osteotomy. The effect of lateral tibiofemoral separation and tibiofemoral length. Clin Orthop Relat Res 274:248–264
El-Azab HM, Morgenstern M, Ahrens P, Schuster T, Imhoff AB, Lorenz SG (2011) Limb alignment after open-wedge high tibial osteotomy and its effect on the clinical outcome. Orthopedics 34(10):e622–e628
Feucht MJ, Mauro CS, Brucker PU, Imhoff AB, Hinterwimmer S (2013) The role of the tibial slope in sustaining and treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):134–145
Filardo G, Vannini F, Marcacci M, Andriolo L, Ferruzzi A, Giannini S, Kon E (2013) Matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte transplantation for cartilage regeneration in osteoarthritic knees: results and failures at midterm follow-up. Am J Sports Med 41(1):95–100
Floerkemeier S, Staubli AE, Schroeter S, Goldhahn S, Lobenhoffer P (2013) Outcome after high tibial open-wedge osteotomy: a retrospective evaluation of 533 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):170–180
Franceschi F, Longo UG, Ruzzini L, Marinozzi A, Maffulli N, Denaro V (2008) Simultaneous arthroscopic implantation of autologous chondrocytes and high tibial osteotomy for tibial chondral defects in the varus knee. Knee 15(4):309–313
Fujisawa Y, Masuhara K, Shiomi S (1979) The effect of high tibial osteotomy on osteoarthritis of the knee. An arthroscopic study of 54 knee joints. Orthop Clin N Am 10(3):585–608
Gardiner A, Gutierrez Sevilla GR, Steiner ME, Richmond JC (2010) Osteotomies about the knee for tibiofemoral malalignment in the athletic patient. Am J Sports Med 38(5):1038–1047
Gebhard F, Krettek C, Hufner T, Grutzner PA, Stockle U, Imhoff AB, Lorenz S, Ljungqvist J, Keppler P (2011) Reliability of computer-assisted surgery as an intraoperative ruler in navigated high tibial osteotomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131(3):297–302
Ghazavi MT, Pritzker KP, Davis AM, Gross AE (1997) Fresh osteochondral allografts for post-traumatic osteochondral defects of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 79(6):1008–1013
Giffin JR, Shannon FJ (2007) The role of the high tibial osteotomy in the unstable knee. Sports Med Arthrosc 15(1):23–31
Giffin JR, Stabile KJ, Zantop T, Vogrin TM, Woo SL, Harner CD (2007) Importance of tibial slope for stability of the posterior cruciate ligament deficient knee. Am J Sports Med 35(9):1443–1449
Giffin JR, Vogrin TM, Zantop T, Woo SL, Harner CD (2004) Effects of increasing tibial slope on the biomechanics of the knee. Am J Sports Med 32(2):376–382
Hankemeier S, Gosling T, Richter M, Hufner T, Hochhausen C, Krettek C (2006) Computer-assisted analysis of lower limb geometry: higher intraobserver reliability compared to conventional method. Comput Aided Surg 11(2):81–86
Hankemeier S, Hufner T, Wang G, Kendoff D, Zeichen J, Zheng G, Krettek C (2006) Navigated open-wedge high tibial osteotomy: advantages and disadvantages compared to the conventional technique in a cadaver study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14(10):917–921
Hernigou P, Medevielle D, Debeyre J, Goutallier D (1987) Proximal tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis with varus deformity. A ten to thirteen-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69(3):332–354
Hinterwimmer S, Beitzel K, Paul J, Kirchhoff C, Sauerschnig M, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Imhoff AB (2011) Control of posterior tibial slope and patellar height in open-wedge valgus high tibial osteotomy. Am J Sports Med 39(4):851–856
Insall JN, Joseph DM, Msika C (1984) High tibial osteotomy for varus gonarthrosis. A long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66(7):1040–1048
Kawakami H, Sugano N, Yonenobu K, Yoshikawa H, Ochi T, Hattori A, Suzuki N (2004) Effects of rotation on measurement of lower limb alignment for knee osteotomy. J Orthop Res 22(6):1248–1253
Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16(4):494–502
Laprade RF, Engebretsen L, Johansen S, Wentorf FA, Kurtenbach C (2008) The effect of a proximal tibial medial opening wedge osteotomy on posterolateral knee instability: a biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med 36(5):956–960
Majima T, Yasuda K, Katsuragi R, Kaneda K (2000) Progression of joint arthrosis 10 to 15 years after high tibial osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 381:177–184
Marti CB, Gautier E, Wachtl SW, Jakob RP (2004) Accuracy of frontal and sagittal plane correction in open-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Arthroscopy 20(4):366–372
McNamara I, Birmingham TB, Fowler PJ, Giffin JR (2013) High tibial osteotomy: evolution of research and clinical applications-a Canadian experience. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):23–31
Mina C, Garrett WE Jr, Pietrobon R, Glisson R, Higgins L (2008) High tibial osteotomy for unloading osteochondral defects in the medial compartment of the knee. Am J Sports Med 36(5):949–955
Minas T, Peterson L (1999) Advanced techniques in autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Clin Sports Med 18(1):13–44, v-vi
Miniaci A, Ballmer FT, Ballmer PM, Jakob RP (1989) Proximal tibial osteotomy. A new fixation device. Clin Orthop Relat Res 246:250–259
Minzlaff P, Feucht MJ, Saier T, Schuster T, Braun S, Imhoff AB, Hinterwimmer S (2013) Osteochondral autologous transfer combined with valgus high tibial osteotomy: long-term results and survivorship analysis. Am J Sports Med 41(10):2325–2332. doi:10.1177/0363546513496624
Muller M, Strecker W (2008) Arthroscopy prior to osteotomy around the knee? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128(11):1217–1221
Naudie DD, Amendola A, Fowler PJ (2004) Opening wedge high tibial osteotomy for symptomatic hyperextension-varus thrust. Am J Sports Med 32(1):60–70
Niemeyer P, Koestler W, Kaehny C, Kreuz PC, Brooks CJ, Strohm PC, Helwig P, Suedkamp NP (2008) Two-year results of open-wedge high tibial osteotomy with fixation by medial plate fixator for medial compartment arthritis with varus malalignment of the knee. Arthroscopy 24(7):796–804
Niemeyer P, Lenz P, Kreuz PC, Salzmann GM, Sudkamp NP, Schmal H, Steinwachs M (2010) Chondrocyte-seeded type I/III collagen membrane for autologous chondrocyte transplantation: prospective 2-year results in patients with cartilage defects of the knee joint. Arthroscopy 26(8):1074–1082
Niemeyer P, Schmal H, Hauschild O, von Heyden J, Sudkamp NP, Kostler W (2010) Open-wedge osteotomy using an internal plate fixator in patients with medial-compartment gonarthritis and varus malalignment: 3-year results with regard to preoperative arthroscopic and radiographic findings. Arthroscopy 26(12):1607–1616
Noyes FR, Barber SD, Simon R (1993) High tibial osteotomy and ligament reconstruction in varus angulated, anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. A two- to seven-year follow-up study. Am J Sports Med 21(1):2–12
Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD, Hewett TE (2000) High tibial osteotomy and ligament reconstruction for varus angulated anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. Am J Sports Med 28(3):282–296
Oakeshott RD, Farine I, Pritzker KP, Langer F, Gross AE (1988) A clinical and histologic analysis of failed fresh osteochondral allografts. Clin Orthop Relat Res 233:283–294
Pape D, Rupp S (2007) Preoperative planning for high tibial osteotomies. Oper Tech Orthop 17:2–11
Parker DA, Viskontas DG (2007) Osteotomy for the early varus arthritic knee. Sports Med Arthrosc 15(1):3–14
Pfahler M, Lutz C, Anetzberger H, Maier M, Hausdorf J, Pellengahr C, Refior HJ (2003) Long-term results of high tibial osteotomy for medial osteoarthritis of the knee. Acta Chir Belg 103(6):603–606
Phisitkul P, Wolf BR, Amendola A (2006) Role of high tibial and distal femoral osteotomies in the treatment of lateral-posterolateral and medial instabilities of the knee. Sports Med Arthrosc 14(2):96–104
Reising K, Strohm PC, Hauschild O, Schmal H, Khattab M, Sudkamp NP, Niemeyer P (2013) Computer-assisted navigation for the intraoperative assessment of lower limb alignment in high tibial osteotomy can avoid outliers compared with the conventional technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):181–188
Riegger-Krugh C, Gerhart TN, Powers WR, Hayes WC (1998) Tibiofemoral contact pressures in degenerative joint disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res 348:233–245
Rossi R, Bonasia DE, Amendola A (2011) The role of high tibial osteotomy in the varus knee. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 19(10):590–599
Salzmann GM, Ahrens P, Naal FD, El-Azab H, Spang JT, Imhoff AB, Lorenz S (2009) Sporting activity after high tibial osteotomy for the treatment of medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med 37(2):312–318
Salzmann GM, Niemeyer P, Steinwachs M, Kreuz PC, Sudkamp NP, Mayr HO (2011) Cartilage repair approach and treatment characteristics across the knee joint: a European survey. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131(3):283–291
Saragaglia D, Mercier N, Colle PE (2010) Computer-assisted osteotomies for genu varum deformity: which osteotomy for which varus? Int Orthop 34(2):185–190
Schinhan M, Gruber M, Dorotka R, Pilz M, Stelzeneder D, Chiari C, Rossler N, Windhager R, Nehrer S (2013) Matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation in a compartmentalized early stage of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 21(1):217–225
Schroter S, Ihle C, Mueller J, Lobenhoffer P, Stockle U, van Heerwaarden R (2013) Digital planning of high tibial osteotomy. Interrater reliability by using two different software. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):189–196
Schroter S, Mueller J, van Heerwaarden R, Lobenhoffer P, Stockle U, Albrecht D (2013) Return to work and clinical outcome after open wedge HTO. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):213–219
Seil R, van Heerwaarden R, Lobenhoffer P, Kohn D (2013) The rapid evolution of knee osteotomies. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):1–2
Smith JO, Wilson AJ, Thomas NP (2013) Osteotomy around the knee: evolution, principles and results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):3–22
Sprenger TR, Doerzbacher JF (2003) Tibial osteotomy for the treatment of varus gonarthrosis. Survival and failure analysis to twenty-two years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(3):469–474
Sterett WI, Steadman JR (2004) Chondral resurfacing and high tibial osteotomy in the varus knee. Am J Sports Med 32(5):1243–1249
Sterett WI, Steadman JR, Huang MJ, Matheny LM, Briggs KK (2010) Chondral resurfacing and high tibial osteotomy in the varus knee: survivorship analysis. Am J Sports Med 38(7):1420–1424
Van Thiel GS, Frank RM, Gupta A, Ghodadra N, Shewman EF, Wang VM, Bach BR, Verma NN, Cole BJ, Provencher MT (2011) Biomechanical evaluation of a high tibial osteotomy with a meniscal transplant. J Knee Surg 24(1):45–53
Verdonk PC, Verstraete KL, Almqvist KF, De Cuyper K, Veys EM, Verbruggen G, Verdonk R (2006) Meniscal allograft transplantation: long-term clinical results with radiological and magnetic resonance imaging correlations. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14(8):694–706
Voos JE, Suero EM, Citak M, Petrigliano FP, Bosscher MR, Wickiewicz TL, Pearle AD (2012) Effect of tibial slope on the stability of the anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(8):1626–1631
Conflict of interest
The authors state that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Feucht, M.J., Minzlaff, P., Saier, T. et al. Degree of axis correction in valgus high tibial osteotomy: proposal of an individualised approach. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 38, 2273–2280 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2442-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2442-7