A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing the clinical and radiological outcomes following minimally invasive to conventional exposure for total knee arthroplasty

Knee. 2012 Jan;19(1):1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2010.12.001. Epub 2010 Dec 31.


Proponents of minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty (TKA) state accelerated patient recovery and increased patient satisfaction as advantages. However, retractors state a greater incidence of iatrogenic nerve injury, implant mal-positioning and increased rates of revision. This study compares the clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive and conventional exposure TKA using a meta-analysis. A search of published and unpublished literature was performed. Eighteen studies including 1582 TKAs were reviewed: 822 minimally invasive versus 760 conventional exposure TKAs. The findings of this study suggest that whilst incision length was significantly smaller in MIS (p=0.001), and flexion range of motion was significantly greater following MIS (p=0.01), there was no statistically significant differences in all other clinical or radiological outcomes between MIS or conventional approach TKA surgery (p>0.05).

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Meta-Analysis
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / adverse effects
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / methods*
  • Humans
  • Knee Joint / diagnostic imaging
  • Knee Joint / surgery
  • Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures* / adverse effects
  • Outcome Assessment, Health Care*
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Radiography
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Treatment Outcome