Distal Femoral Osteotomy for the Valgus Knee: Medial Closing Wedge Versus Lateral Opening Wedge: A Systematic Review

Purpose: (1) To determine the radiographic correction/healing rate, patient-reported outcomes, reoperation rate, and complication rate after distal femoral osteotomy (DFO) for the valgus knee with lateral compartment pathology. (2) To summarize the reported results of medial closing wedge and lateral opening wedge DFO. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL to identify studies reporting outcomes of DFOs for the valgus knee. Keywords included "distal femoral osteotomy," "chondral," "cartilage," "valgus," "joint restoration," " joint preservation," "arthritis," and "gonarthrosis." Two authors first reviewed the articles; our study exclusion criteria were then applied, and the articles were included on the basis relevance defined by the aforementioned criteria. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies scale judged the quality of the literature. Sixteen studies were relevant to the research questions out of 191 studies identified by the original search. Results: Sixteen studies were identified reporting on 372 osteotomies with mean follow-up of 45 to 180 months. All studies reported mean radiographic correction to a near neutral mechanical axis, with 3.2% nonunion and 3.8% delayed union rates. There was a 9% complication rate and a 34% reoperation rate, of which 15% were converted to arthroplasty. There were similar results reported for medial closing wedge and lateral opening wedge techniques, with a higher conversion to arthroplasty in the medial closing wedge that was confounded by longer mean follow-up in this group (mean follow-up 100 v 58 months). Conclusions: DFOs for the valgus knee with lateral compartment disease provide improvements in patient-reported knee health-related quality of life at midterm follow-up but have high rates of reoperation. No evidence exists proving better results of either the lateral opening wedge or medial closing wedge techniques. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.