Scholarlink

Objective <p>For patients with bilateral knee osteoarthritis, staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (StaBTKA) is generally considered lower in perioperative risk, while simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty (SimBTKA) enables one-stage deformity correction and potential earlier rehabilitation, with its safety debated. This study aimed to systematically compare their clinical outcomes using available observational evidence.</p> Methods <p>PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies published between January 1, 2000 and August 31, 2025. Cohort studies comparing SimBTKA and StaBTKA were included, and all eligible studies were observational in design.</p> Results <p>A total of 53 cohort studies involving 572,881 patients were included, comprising 244,207 patients in the SimBTKA group and 328,674 in the StaBTKA group. In studies reporting comparable short-term mortality windows, SimBTKA was associated with higher reported short-term mortality than StaBTKA (OR = 2.35, 95% CI 1.69–3.27, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). SimBTKA was also associated with a higher incidence of deep vein thrombosis (OR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.37–1.53; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) and greater transfusion requirements (OR = 4.42, 95% CI 3.11–6.28; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). Length of stay tended to be shorter with SimBTKA, particularly in Asian studies; however, substantial heterogeneity limited the interpretability of a precise pooled estimate. In contrast, StaBTKA was associated with higher rates of superficial and deep infection (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.54–0.89; <i>P</i> = 0.004; OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.61–0.70; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the two strategies in revision rates, pulmonary embolism, neurological complications, or cardiac events.</p> Conclusion <p>SimBTKA and StaBTKA have distinct risk profiles rather than one being universally superior. SimBTKA was linked to higher reported short-term mortality, DVT, and transfusion, whereas StaBTKA was associated with higher infection rates. The mortality finding should be interpreted cautiously because survivor selection bias may underestimate true risk in the StaBTKA group. Surgical strategy should be individualized, balancing patient comorbidities, perioperative safety, treatment efficiency, and healthcare resource utilization.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparing simultaneous and staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月15日

查看全文
  • Hongzhao Wang,
  • Yabing Jiang,
  • Xiao Wang,
  • Tianyun Zhao

摘要

Objective

For patients with bilateral knee osteoarthritis, staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (StaBTKA) is generally considered lower in perioperative risk, while simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty (SimBTKA) enables one-stage deformity correction and potential earlier rehabilitation, with its safety debated. This study aimed to systematically compare their clinical outcomes using available observational evidence.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies published between January 1, 2000 and August 31, 2025. Cohort studies comparing SimBTKA and StaBTKA were included, and all eligible studies were observational in design.

Results

A total of 53 cohort studies involving 572,881 patients were included, comprising 244,207 patients in the SimBTKA group and 328,674 in the StaBTKA group. In studies reporting comparable short-term mortality windows, SimBTKA was associated with higher reported short-term mortality than StaBTKA (OR = 2.35, 95% CI 1.69–3.27, P < 0.001). SimBTKA was also associated with a higher incidence of deep vein thrombosis (OR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.37–1.53; P < 0.001) and greater transfusion requirements (OR = 4.42, 95% CI 3.11–6.28; P < 0.001). Length of stay tended to be shorter with SimBTKA, particularly in Asian studies; however, substantial heterogeneity limited the interpretability of a precise pooled estimate. In contrast, StaBTKA was associated with higher rates of superficial and deep infection (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.54–0.89; P = 0.004; OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.61–0.70; P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the two strategies in revision rates, pulmonary embolism, neurological complications, or cardiac events.

Conclusion

SimBTKA and StaBTKA have distinct risk profiles rather than one being universally superior. SimBTKA was linked to higher reported short-term mortality, DVT, and transfusion, whereas StaBTKA was associated with higher infection rates. The mortality finding should be interpreted cautiously because survivor selection bias may underestimate true risk in the StaBTKA group. Surgical strategy should be individualized, balancing patient comorbidities, perioperative safety, treatment efficiency, and healthcare resource utilization.