Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 11, 2026
The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
The Influence of Total Knee Arthroplasty Surgical Approach on Range of Motion, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures, and
Joshua P Rainey1, Logan E Radtke1, Jeremy M Gililland1
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Background:
Various surgical approaches may be used to perform total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This systematic review assessed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating various TKA approaches and their influence on knee range of motion (ROM), patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and reoperation rates.
Methods:
A search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed for manuscripts published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2024. Inclusion criteria consisted of RCTs evaluating knee ROM, PROMs, and reoperation rates of various TKA surgical approaches. Modified Coleman methodology scoring and level of evidence were assigned to each study. Non-English manuscripts, studies with fewer than 30 patients in each group, or studies with a mean follow-up of less than three months were excluded. A total of 27 manuscripts met final inclusion, and all were level 1 evidence with fair or better modified Coleman scores (mean 74.9, range 64 to 89).
Results:
Among the 25 RCTs that evaluated postoperative knee ROM, three studies supported the subvastus approach, two supported the midvastus approach, and two supported the mini medial parapatellar (MPP) approach when compared to a standard MPP. The remaining 18 studies found no difference in ROM between surgical approaches. Various PROMs were evaluated in 26 studies. Of these, three studies favored the subvastus approach, two favored the midvastus approach, one favored the mini MPP approach, and one favored the standard MPP approach. The remaining 19 studies found no difference in PROMs. Of the 21 studies that evaluated reoperation rates, 10 studies had no reoperations in either group, four studies found no difference in reoperation rates, and seven studies reported on reoperations.
Conclusions:
Based on recent, high-quality RCTs, no single surgical approach consistently outperforms others regarding ROM, PROMs, and reoperation rates. However, a small number of studies demonstrated potential benefits with the subvastus, midvastus, and mini MPP approaches.
