Skip to main content

Table 4 Subgroup analysis of radiological outcomes

From: Is gap balancing superior to measured resection technique in total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis

Radiological outcomes by study designGroups (n)Overall effectP valueI2
GBMREffect estimate95% CI
Rotation of the femoral component1281340.54°−0.05-1.13°0.07346.0%
RCTs [15]48481.00°0.031–1.969°0.043NE
Prospective cohort [8, 14]80860.27°−0.470 -1.010°0.47557.0%
Post-operative value of mechanical axis2352400.40°0.10–0.71°0.0141.6%
RCTs [11, 18]1301260.68°0.26–1.11°0.0020.0%
Prospective cohort [8, 19]1051140.11°−0.32- 0.55°0.60718.2%
Risk of mechanical alignment outlier1741550.3500.19–0.63°< 0.00010.0%
RCTs [11, 18]1301260.3750.202–0.6960.0020.0%
Prospective cohort [19]57660.1930.024–1.5560.122NE
Joint line elevation1381481.27 mm1.64–1.96 mm< 0.00010.0%
RCTs [13, 15]81821.319 mm0.905–1.732 mm< 0.00010.0%
Prospective cohort [19]57661.100 mm0.285–1.915 mm0.008NE
  1. GB Gap balancing, MR Measured resection, NE Not estimatable, Entries in italic were considered as statistically significant