A comparative study of 21,194 UKAs and 49,270 HTOs for the risk of unanticipated events in mid-age patients from the national claims data in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Both high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are well-established treatments for medial knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, over the past 20 years, results of comparisons of long-term survival rates and outcomes have remained controversial. Furthermore, in patients at the boundary age, from 50 to 70 years, considering age as a treatment indication, selecting a surgical method is difficult. Therefore, we aimed to investigate conversion rates to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and perioperative adverse outcomes between the two surgical methods in mid-age patients.

METHODS: We extracted data from the Korean National Health Insurance claims database. A total of 70,464 patients aged between 50 and 70 years, considered as mid-age patients were included in the final study population. We used a multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model, adjusting for potential confounders such as age, sex, insurance type, region of residence, hospital type, comorbidities, and the Charlson comorbidity Index (CCI).

RESULTS: Of the 70,464 patients, 21,194 were treated with UKA and 49,270 were treated with HTO. HTO showed a higher risk of revision than UKA at five, and 10 years and during the whole observation period. The incidence of deep vein thromboembolism, and surgical site infection was significantly higher in UKA than in HTO.

CONCLUSIONS: It is important to choose an appropriate surgical method considering that UKA has better results in terms of long-term survival rates but may have a higher incidence of various complications.