Forgotten joint score associated with prosthesis weight in cementless total hip arthroplasty: a prospective clinical study.

Background: This prospective study aimed to investigate the influence of weight difference between implanted prosthesis and removed bone in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) on hip awareness and patient-reported outcomes. Methods: A total of 48 patients (56 hips) who underwent primary THA were prospectively enrolled. Implanted prosthesis and removed bone were weighed intraoperatively. Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) scores were obtained before and at 1 and 3 months after surgery. Patients were divided into groups A, B, and C according to the percentile of the weight difference. Results: The mean weight difference of the implanted prosthesis and removed bone was 117.97 ± 47.35 g. A negative correlation was found among the weight differences of the three groups and 1- and 3-month postoperative FJS (correlation coefficients, -0.331 and -0.734, respectively). A positive correlation was found among the weight difference of the three groups and 3-month postoperative WOMAC (correlation coefficient, 0.403). A significant difference in 3-month postoperative FJS and WOMAC scores was found among the three groups. The mean 3-month postoperative FJS (79.00) of group C was significantly lower than that of group A (93.32) (P < 0.05). The mean WOMAC score (15.83) of group A was significantly lower than that of group C (23.67) (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The implanted prosthesis is larger than the removed bone in cementless THA. The weight difference is negatively correlated with hip function. The weight difference should be minimized to achieve optimal hip joint awareness.

Comparison of four patient reported outcome measures in patients with ankle fracture: A study on patient preferences and psychometric properties.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to assess psychometric properties of Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS), the Olerud Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) in adults with ankle fractures. METHODS: Patients received all four questionnaires 6, 12, 14, 24, 52, and 104 weeks following an ankle fracture. According to COSMIN guidelines, statistical tests were performed to assess floor- and ceiling effects, structural validity, construct validity and reliability. Cognitive interview was performed with 9 patients. RESULTS: MOXFQ showed best model fit in Confirmatory Factor Analysis. When testing construct validity, all hypotheses were accepted except for OMAS and FJS. All questionnaires had an almost perfect test-retest reliability (Interclass Correlation Coefficient 0.81 to 0.91) and Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.76 to 0.95. MOXFQ was the best rated questionnaire. CONCLUSION: All questionnaires performed well and we recommend MOXFQ for future use in ankle fracture studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Item-reduced Forgotten Joint Score provides adequate psychometric properties in ACLR patients.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate content validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, construct validity, responsiveness and floor/ceiling effects of Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) for assessing functions in activities of daily living (ADL) following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and perform an item reduction of FJS. Methods: Swedish-speaking ACLR patients in one surgical clinic were eligible. Content validity was evaluated through patient responses and patient and expert clinician relevance ratings, omitting items with low relevance. Principal component factor analysis, Cronbach's ⍺, paired t test, correlations between FJS and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Cohen's d effect sizes (ESs) and standardized response mean (SRM) were used to evaluate internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness. Floor/ceiling effects were calculated. FJS was expected to reveal one dominant factor, a Cronbach's ⍺ between 0.70 and 0.95, correlations >0.50 to all KOOS subscores, highest for ADL, moderate ES and SRM, floor/ceiling effects <15%. Results: One hundred and seventy-six participants (103 for assessing internal consistency, construct validity, responsiveness and floor/ceiling effects; 73 for assessing test-retest reliability and content validity) were included. Item reduction yielded a nine-item FJS (FJS-9). FJS-12 and FJS-9 demonstrated sufficient content validity (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.1, respectively, 2.9-3.3). FJS-9 was found unidimensional, and FJS-12 was multidimensional. Cronbach's ⍺ was 0.94 for FJS, and the intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.90. FJS showed significant correlations >0.65 to all KOOS subscales, moderate ES and SRM > 0.50. No floor/ceiling effects were found. Conclusion: FJS-9 demonstrated adequate validity for the evaluation of joint awareness in ACLR patients and can be a valuable tool to assess ADL and joint awareness. Level of Eidence: Level III.

The Negative Impacts of Sarcopenia on Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty under the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol.

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia, as an emerging public health concern, has been associated with postoperative adverse outcomes in various surgical procedures. However, the evidence regarding the impacts of sarcopenia on total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remained limited. This study aimed to assess the impacts of sarcopenia on primary TKA based on the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol. METHODS: This retrospective study included 291 patients who received unilateral TKA from October 2017 to May 2018 in our institution. Sarcopenia was diagnosed based on the algorithm of Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019. The handgrip strength was measured using a handheld dynamometer and the muscle mass was estimated by a previously validated anthropometric equation. Patients were classified into sarcopenia group and non-sarcopenia group. The outcomes included complications, postoperative length of stay (LOS), total hospitalization cost, operative time, total estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and the 12-item forgotten joint score (FJS-12) at the follow-up. The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust confounding factors. We compared continuous variables using Student's t-test and the Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U test for normal and non-normal distributions, respectively, and categorical variables with chi-square tests. RESULTS: Of the 291 patients, 58 (19.9%) patients were identified as having sarcopenia. After PSM, each group matched 42 patients. All matched patients were followed-up at least 5 years. Patients with sarcopenia had higher rates of surgical complications compared to the non-sarcopenia group (p = 0.019), and no significant difference was observed in 30-day readmission, and periprosthetic joint infection. The sarcopenia group had significantly longer LOS (p = 0.038), higher total hospitalization (p = 0.015) than the non-sarcopenia group. For the FJS-12 scores at follow-up, patients with sarcopenia had significantly higher scores than the non-sarcopenia group (p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated sarcopenia may be a risk factor for postoperative complications, prolonged LOS, increased hospitalization cost and reduced patient satisfaction.

A retrospective comparison of mechanically vs. kinematically aligned unicompartmental knee arthroplasties.

Background: Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties (UKAs) treat unicompartmental arthritic degeneration. Traditionally, they are placed in a mechanical alignment with bone cuts perpendicular to the leg's mechanical axis. Kinematic alignment, an alternative, considers the patient's pre-arthritic alignment. Methods: A retrospective study at Medstar Washington Hospital Center from 2015 to 2022 identified 72 UKA patients. Among them, 53 had mechanical alignments, and 20 had kinematic alignments. Using the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Patient Reported Outcome Measures for these surgeries were recorded. Individuals were additionally analyzed post-surgically for Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK). Analysis was performed within the post-operative joint imaging, where mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) were measured. The arithmetic hip knee ankle angle (aHKA) and joint line obliquity (JLO) were calculated according to the results of MPTA-LDFA and MPTA + LDFA respectively and grouped in accordance with the CPAK classification. Results: Overall, there was a statistically significant response rate of 51% (>50%). According to the FJS, the mechanical cohort averaged a score of 39.1 (±33.8), while the kinematical cohort averaged 56.5 (±35.2). A two-sample t-test of this data demonstrated a statistically insignificant p-value of 0.1537. According to the OKS, the mechanical cohort averaged a score of 29.1 (±10) and the kinematical cohort averaged 38.4 (±8). A two-sample t-test of this data demonstrated a statistically significant p-value of <0.001. Of note, 7 patients had to undergo revisions in the mechanical alignment cohort compared to 0 in the kinematic alignment cohort due to aseptic loosening. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the potential benefit in patient outcomes for individuals who undergo a kinematic rather than mechanical alignment of their UKAs. The results of the CPAK data with the significance of LDFA are consistent with the goals of the mechanical and kinematic alignment respectively.

Joint awareness among total hip arthroplasty patients operated through anterior approach versus posterior approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare joint awareness in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) via the anterior approach (AA) versus the posterior approach (PA). The hypothesis was that patients who underwent THA via AA would have better forgetfulness of the artificial joint. METHODS: A comprehensive search of major literature databases and bibliographic details was conducted to identify studies evaluating the forgotten joint score (FJS-12) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients operated through the anterior approach (AA) and posterior approach (PA). Out of 234 studies identified, seven studies met the inclusion criteria for review. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and the risk of bias in the included studies. The FJS-12 was evaluated at three months, one year, and beyond 2 years. RESULTS: The mean FJS-12 at > 2 years was 82.03 in the AA group and 80.32 in the PA group. The forest plot analysis (n = 819 patients) revealed no significant difference in FJS-12 score between these two approaches (MD 2.13, 95% CI [- 1.17, 5.42], p = 0.21; I2 = 60%). However, the joint awareness was significantly lesser in the AA group at 3 months (MD 12.56, 95% CI [9.58, 15.54], p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%) and 1 year (MD 9.55, 95% CI [7.85, 11.24], p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: After analyzing the available literature, it was found that THA patients operated through the AA approach have significantly lower joint awareness than those operated through the PA approach in the first year of surgery. However, there is no significant difference in joint awareness between these two approaches after 2 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Predictors Associated with Forgotten Knee in Patients with Total Knee Arthroplasty Based on Multivariable Linear Regression.

OBJECTIVE: Existing studies have conflicting results about the predictors of forgotten joints in patients with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and the relationship between psychosocial factors and forgotten knees is unknown. The purpose of this study was to confirm predictors for the forgotten joint in TKA patients. METHODS: This was an observational, prospective longitudinal study. A total of 205 patients who underwent TKA and a 6-month follow-up were included between August 2020 and September 2021. Demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and psychosocial variables were collected before TKA surgery (T0). The forgotten joint score (FJS) was taken before TKA surgery (T0) and at 1 month (T1), 3 months (T3), and 6 months (T6) after TKA surgery. The psychosocial variables were also completed at T6. Bivariate and multivariable linear regressions (LR) were performed to screen the predictors associated with FJS (T6). RESULTS: Patients who underwent TKA in our study had a mean FJS of 20.3 ± 12.2 before surgery, 15.9 ± 10.3 at 1 month, 28.7 ± 12.6 at 3 months, and 40.3 ± 12.5 at 6 months. The predictors were sex, combined musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), operation time, FJS (T3), range of motion (ROM) (T6), pain score (T6), Groningen orthopaedic social support scale (GO-SSS) score (T6), and the generalized anxiety disorder scale (GAD) score (T6). The data satisfied the assumptions of multivariable linear regressions. The multiple R2 of LR was 0.71, and the adjusted R2 was 0.70. The F-statistic of the LR model was 59.5 (p < 0.000). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed the level of forgotten knee decreased slightly from preoperation to 1 month postoperatively and then increased from 1 month postoperatively to 6 months postoperatively in TKA patients. The main predictors associated with the FJS at 6 months after surgery were sex, combined MSD, operation time, FJS (T3), ROM (T6), pain score (T6), GO-SSS score (T6), and anxiety (T6).

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improves the rotational mismatch between femoral and tibial components, but not the forgotten joint score 12: a single-center retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to compare postoperative short-term patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) and rotational mismatch between femoral and tibial following conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty (Conv-TKA) versus robotic-assisted TKA (RA-TKA) using three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) measurements. METHODS: This retrospective, consecutive case-control trial included 83 patients with varus osteoarthritis of the knee undergoing Conv-TKA versus RA-TKA using bi-cruciate stabilized TKA. The rotational mismatch of the femoral and tibial components between the two groups were compared using 3DCT measurements. PROMs (2011 Knee Society Score (KSS), forgotten joint score-12 (FJS-12), patella score were compared in patients between 1 and 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: The two groups did not exhibit significant differences in any of the following preoperative factors: age at surgery, body mass index (BMI), preoperative range of motion (ROM), hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. There were no significant differences in postoperative HKA angle and tibial rotation angle, the absolute values of the femoral rotational angle and rotational mismatch were significantly smaller in the RA-TKA group than in the Conv-TKA group (both p < 0.01). Neither Postoperative PROMs (2011 KSS: pain, patient satisfaction, patient expectation, advanced activities score) nor patella score differed significantly between the groups, but FJS-12 was significantly better in the Conv-TKA group than in the RA-TKA group (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: RA-TKA did not improve FJS-12 compared to Conv-TKA, but did result in more accurate rotational alignment of femoral component and rotational mismatch between the femoral and tibial components. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Evaluation of the Validity and Reliability of a Persian Version of the Forgotten Joint Score in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Objectives: The increasing number of total hip arthroplasties (THA) has led to increased patient demands and expectations, making it crucial to assess patients' ability to "forget" their implants in daily life. This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of a Persian version of the Forgotten Joint Score (P-FJS) in THA patients. Methods: The questionnaire was translated bidirectionally with the permission of the questionnaire designer. Data were collected from 2018 to 2020 and included 142 patients who had undergone THA by the same surgeon at least one year ago. Participants completed the FJS questionnaire twice within a one-week interval, and the validity, reliability, and feasibility of the questionnaires were assessed using statistical tests on the HHS and OHS forms completed by all participants. Results: In 142 patients (52.1% male) with a mean age of 65 ± 0.5 years who answered the questionnaires, P-FJS correlated strongly with OHS and HHS. The internal consistency (α = 0.91) and reproducibility of the questionnaire were excellent. None of the floor and ceiling effects were detected. Conclusion: The P-FJS questionnaire in the THA is considered a legitimate, repeatable, and self-administered survey that can be compared to its English-language counterpart. In addition, it is noteworthy that this version does not show any floor or ceiling effects.

The Joint Awareness Score: A Shortened, Simplified, Improved Alternative to the Forgotten Joint Score.

Background: The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a 12-question patient-reported outcomes measure created to measure a patient's awareness of their artificial joint. The FJS has attained wide usage, though it is not without weaknesses. Our patients report that the semantics of the English translation are flawed and that the 5 answer options for each question are poorly differentiated. Additionally, the FJS will result in no score if 3 or more questions are unanswered. This prompted the development of an alternative patient-reported outcomes measure, the Joint Awareness Score (JAS), that builds upon the core concept of joint awareness underlying the FJS, but that is easier to understand and shorter to complete. We completed an exploratory, pilot study to evaluate this outcomes instrument. Our hypothesis is that the JAS will correlate strongly with the FJS and could be used as a substitute. Methods: Knee arthroplasty patients in a prospective registry were administered the FJS and the JAS. Internal consistency and correlation were calculated with Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's correlation coefficient, respectively. Results: This study included 174 patients. Cronbach's alpha for FJS was 0.97 for 6 months and 0.97 for 12 months, whereas JAS was 0.89 at 6 months and 0.85 at 12 months. Pearson correlation comparing FJS and JAS at 6 months was 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.83, 0.92) and 0.86 (95% confidence interval: 0.78, 0.92) at 12 months. Conclusions: The Joint Awareness Score is a new patient-reported outcomes measure that is a substitute for the FJS, with half the number of questions, improved semantics, and simplified answers.

Negative correlation between central sensitization and forgotten joint score-12 after total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Central sensitization is a condition in which even mild stimuli cause pain due to increased neuronal reactivity in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. It is one of factors of chronic pain in patients with osteoarthritis. However, it is unknown whether central sensitization relates to clinical outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to clarify whether preoperative central sensitization relates to the forgotten joint score-12 (FJS) after THA. Moreover, the secondary outcome was to identify which items in the FJS were most related by central sensitization. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 263 hips (263 patients; 51 males and 212 females) that underwent primary THA in our institute and were available for evaluation one year postoperatively. The average patient age was 64.8 ± 11.9 years. The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) part A, which is a patient-reported outcome, was used to measure preoperative central sensitization. The correlation between preoperative CSI and postoperative FJS and the association between postoperative FJS and preoperative CSI severity were determined. Moreover, difference in each FJS item was evaluated by CSI severity. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (9.9%) had central sensitization preoperatively. Preoperative CSI scores and postoperative FJS were negatively correlated (r = - 0.331, p < 0.0001). The postoperative FJS was significantly lower in patients with moderate or higher preoperative CSI severity than that in patients with subclinical or mild preoperative CSI severity (p < 0.05). FJS items with movement of daily life were significantly worse in the moderate or higher CSI severity compared with subclinical group (p < 0.05 or p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Central sensitization prior to THA negatively related to postoperative FJS. In particular, the relationship of central sensitization was found to be significant in FJS items with movement, which would lead to lower patient satisfaction after THA. To get better postoperative outcomes in patients with preoperative central sensitization, improving central sensitization would be important.

Comparison of joint awareness after total knee arthroplasty, medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and high tibial osteotomy: a retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to compare the Forgotten Joint Score-12(FJS) outcomes and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of the FJS after high tibial osteotomy (HTO), unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with short-term follow-up (at least 2 years). Another objective of the study is to investigate the factors influencing FJS. It is hypothesized that there are differences in FJS outcomes among the three procedures. METHODS: Patients who underwent HTO, UKA, and TKA from January 2016 to December 2020 and were followed up for a minimum of 2 years were included in the study. The FJS were analyses from a cohort of people who submitted data to two years. The preoperative and postoperative clinical outcomes were compared and evaluated the patient-related factor. The FJS scores were predicted using multiple linear regression analysis. Additionally, Patient's Joint Perception (PJP) questions were used as anchors to determine the achievement of the forgotten joint, and FJS MCID were calculated using the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-nine patients were included in the final study, and there were 111 patients in HTO groups,128patients in UKA groups, and 150 patients in TKA groups. The mean follow-up was 47.0 months. There was a significant difference in the total FJS, between the HTO, UKA, and TKA groups (FJS:59.38 ± 7.25, 66.69 ± 7.44 and 56.90 ± 6.85, p < 0.001. We found the MCID of the FJS of HTO, UKA, and TKA were 63.54, 69.79, and 61.45, respectively. In multiple linear regression, younger age, and higher FS were significant predictors of better FJS. CONCLUSION: Medial UKA demonstrated lower patient awareness in comparison to HTO and TKA, as assessed by the FJS. Younger age and higher FS were identified as significant predictors of improved FJS, providing valuable guidance for surgical decision-making.

Does diabetes mellitus impair the clinical results of total knee arthroplasty under enhanced recovery after surgery?

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) and osteoarthritis (OA) are common diseases that are predicted to increase in prevalence, and DM is a risk factor for OA progression and has a negative impact on the outcome. However, the evidence remains unclear on how it affects patients' clinical results of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) under enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted comparing diabetic and non-diabetic patients who underwent TKA in West China Hospital of Sichuan University between September 2016 to December 2017 under ERAS. Consecutive propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted by 1:1 (DM: non-DM) matching analysis with all baselines as covariates. The primary clinical results were the improvement of knee joint function, the incidence of postoperative complications, and the FJS-12 sensory results 5 years after the operation between DM and Non-DM groups. The secondary clinical results were the postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative blood test and total blood loss (TBL). RESULT: After PSM, the final analysis included 84 diabetic patients and 84 non-diabetic patients. Diabetic patients were more likely to experience early postoperative complications (21.4% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.003), of which wound complications are the most significant (10.7% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.022). Diabetic patients experienced longer postoperative LOS with a significant increase in patients with LOS exceeding 3 days (66.7% vs. 50%, P = 0.028) and showed less postoperative range of motion (ROM) (106.43 ± 7.88 vs. 109.50 ± 6.33 degrees, P = 0. 011). Diabetic patients also reported lower Forgotten joint score (FJS-12) than non-diabetic patients (68.16 + 12.16 vs. 71.57 + 10.75, P = 0.020) in the 5-year follow-up and were less likely to achieve a forgotten knee joint (10.7% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.022). In additional, Compared with non-diabetics, diabetic patients showed lower hemoglobin (Hb) (P < 0.001) and hematocrit (HCT) (P < 0.001) and were more likely to suffer from hypertension before TKA (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Diabetic patients show increased risk for postoperative complications, and have lower lower postoperative ROM and lower FJS-12 compared with non-diabetic patients after TKA under ERAS. More perioperative protocols are still needed to be investigated and optimized for diabetic patients.

Cross-cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the Forgotten Joint Score for knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the validity and reliability of the Arabic version of this questionnaire in Arabic patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: The Arabic version of the English FJS (Ar-FJS) was modified according to cross-cultural adaptation best practices. The study included 111 patients who underwent TKA 1-5 years ago and completed the Ar-FJS. The reduced Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (rWOMAC) and 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) were used to assess the construct validity of the study. Fifty-two individuals took the Ar-FJS test twice to evaluate the test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The reliability of the Ar-FJS demonstrated a Cronbach's α value of 0.940 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.951. The ceiling effect of the Ar-FJS was 5.4% (n = 6), whereas the floor effect was 1.8% (n = 2). Additionally, the Ar-FJS showed correlation coefficients of 0.753 and 0.992 for the rWOMAC and SF-36, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Ar-FJS-12 demonstrated excellent internal consistency, repeatability, construct validity, and content validity and can be recommended for patients in Arabic-speaking communities who have undergone knee arthroplasty.

A Torn or Reconstructed Anterior Cruciate Ligament Does Not Adversely Affect Clinical Outcome Scores and the Incidence of Reoperation After Unrestricted Kinematically Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There are no reports as to whether the condition of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) adversely affects the 2 to 3 year function and reoperation risk of a kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed with posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) retention and an intermediate medial conforming (MC) insert. METHODS: A single surgeon's prospective database query identified 418 consecutive primary TKAs performed between January 2019 and December 2019. The surgeon recorded the ACL condition in the operative note. Patients filled out the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), Oxford knee score (OKS), and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement at the final follow-up. There were 299 patients with an intact ACL, 99 with a torn ACL, and 20 with a reconstructed ACL. The mean follow-up was 31 months (range, 20 to 45). RESULTS: The median FJS, OKS, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) of the reconstructed/torn/intact KA TKAs were 90/79/67, 47/44/43, and 92/88/80 points, respectively. The median OKS and KOOS of the reconstructed ACL cohort were 4 and 11 points higher than in the intact ACL cohort (P = .003, .04). One patient who had a reconstructed ACL underwent manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) for stiffness. The 5 reoperations in the intact ACL cohort were for instability (n = 2), revision after failed MUA for stiffness (n = 2), and infection (n = 1). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that patients who have a torn and reconstructed ACL can expect high function and a low risk of reoperation comparable to patients who have an intact ACL when treated with unrestricted, caliper-verified KA, PCL retention, and an intermediate MC insert.

Use of the forgotten joint score (FJS)-12 to evaluate knee awareness after quadriceps tendon reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Quadriceps tendon rupture (QTR) is a severe injury of the knee extensor apparatus. The study aims to validate the use of forgotten joint score (FJS-12) for functional outcome assessing after surgical treatment of QTR. METHODS: Fifty-seven patients who underwent surgery for QTR with transosseous suture reconstruction in a single orthopaedic surgery and traumatology center between 2015 and 2020 were eligible for enrolment in this retrospective case series. The demographic data and other pre-operative details such as age, gender, comorbidities and medication use also were extracted from the medical records. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were gathered in the form of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index Score (WOMAC), Tegner Activity Score (TAS), Lysholm Score and FJS-12 at a mean follow-up time of 49.84 months ± 20.64 months. The FJS-12 was validated by correlation with WOMAC, TAS and Lysholm Score. RESULTS: The mean age of all patients were 69.2 ± 13.6 years with 51 (89.5%) males and 6 (10.5%) females. The mean time from injury to surgery was 3.39 ± 5.46 days. All patients reported satisfactory functional outcomes after surgery on FJS-12, WOMAC and Lysholm scores, except the TAS, which decreased slightly from pre-operative level. There was a high negative correlation between WOMAC and FJS-12, but moderate positive correlations between FJS-12 and TAS and Lysholm scores. The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.96 for 12 items in FJS-12. CONCLUSION: This study has found that FJS-12 is a reliable and easy to assess tool for functional outcomes after QTR reconstruction. It has shown moderate to strong correlation with other commonly used outcome measures (WOMAC, TAS and Lysholm).

Forgotten joint score is worse when the affected leg perceived longer than shorter after total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: One of the causes of patient dissatisfaction after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is leg length discrepancy (LLD). Even when radiographic LLD (R-LLD) is within 5 mm, some people perceive the affected side to be longer, while others perceive it is shorter. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between perceived LLD (P-LLD), R-LLD, and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) after THA. METHODS: A retrospective study of 164 patients with unilateral hip disease was conducted. Based on P-LLD after THA, they were classified into three categories: perceived short (PS 21 patients), no LLD (PN 121 patients), and perceived long (PL 22 patients). On the other hand, based on R-LLD after THA, they were divided into < - 5 mm (RS 36 patients), - 5 mm ≤ x < 5 mm (RN 99 patients), and 5 mm ≥ (RL 29 patients), respectively. The proportion of P-LLD in the RN group was also evaluated. In each group, the relationship between P-LLD, R-LLD and FJS-12 was investigated. RESULTS: After THA, the PL group had significantly worse FJS-12 (PS: 68.3 ± 26.2, PN: 75.0 ± 20.9, PL: 47.3 ± 25.2, P < .0001). In the R-LLD evaluation, there was no difference in FJS-12 among the three groups (RS: 73.7 ± 21.1, RN: 70.0 ± 24.5, RL: 67.7 ± 25.4, P < .53). The RN group perceived leg length to be longer (RN-PL) in 12.1% of cases, and the RN-PL groups had significantly worse FJS-12 (RN-PS: 65.4 ± 24.8, RN-PN: 73.8 ± 23.1, RN-PL: 41.8 ± 27.6, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: One year after THA, patients with longer P-LLD had worse FJS-12, even if the R-LLD was less than 5 mm.

Clinical outcome of Bioball universal adapter in revision hip arthroplasty.

Background: Removal of a well-fixed uncemented femoral component in revision hip arthroplasty is challenging. A modular head-neck adapter provides an option to optimise the femoral offset and anteversion, avoiding the need for femoral stem revision. Aim: To present the clinical results following revision arthroplasty with the Bioball head-neck adapter in the elderly American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) Grade II, III & IV patients. Materials and methods: A retrospective review of our database was performed, and all patients classed as ASA grades II, III, & IV treated with the Bioball Universal Adapter (BUA) for 10 years were included. The indication for revision, stem retention, type of adapter, and head size were identified. Patients were contacted by a research nurse to assess the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), and any symptoms of instability at a minimum of one year post revision surgery. Results: Our study included 47 patients. 5 (10.6%) were ASA II, 19 (40.4%) were ASA III and 23 (49%) were ASA IV. The mean age was 74 years. The mean follow up was 52 months ± 28.4 SD. The median FJS was 86 ± 11.6 SD. The median OHS was 43 ± 6.2 SD. One patient (2.1%) developed recurrent dislocation following lumbar spinal fusion. None of the other patients experienced instability. The survival rate for the adapter was 98%. Conclusion: The BUA gives good clinical outcomes with very low post revision instability. It is a valuable option for the elderly because it avoids the morbidity and risks associated with the removal of a well-fixed femoral stem. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Patients Who Have Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 3 and 4 Osteoarthritis Benefit Equally From Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Recently, some payers have limited access to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to patients who have Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade 4 osteoarthritis only. This study compared the outcomes of patients who have KL grade 3 and 4 osteoarthritis after TKA to determine if this new policy is justified. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a series originally established to collect outcomes for a single, cemented implant design. A total of 152 patients underwent primary, unilateral TKA at two centers from 2014 to 2016. Only patients who had KL grade 3 (n = 69) or 4 (n = 83) osteoarthritis were included. There was no difference in age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, or preoperative Knee Society Score (KSS) between the groups. Patients who had KL grade 4 disease had a higher body mass index. KSS and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) were collected preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Generalized linear models were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Controlling for demographics, improvements in KSS were comparable between the groups at all time points. There was no difference in KSS, FJS, and the proportion that achieved the patient acceptable symptom state for FJS at 2 years. CONCLUSION: Patients who had KL grade 3 and 4 osteoarthritis experienced similar improvement at all time points up to 2 years after primary TKA. There is no justification for payers to deny access to surgical treatment for patients who have KL grade 3 osteoarthritis and have otherwise failed nonoperative treatment.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Robotic-Arm Assisted Arthroplasty: A Prospective Cohort Study With Minimum 3 Years' Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-arm assisted total hip arthroplasty (RO THA) has been shown to improve the accuracy of component positioning compared with conventional total hip arthroplasty (CO THA). This study reports Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) of a previous trial that showed that RO THA was associated with improved accuracy and reduced outliers in acetabular component positioning compared with CO THA. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 50 patients undergoing CO THA versus 50 patients receiving RO THA. The Oxford hip score, Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), University of California at Los Angeles hip score were recorded at a minimum of 3 years following surgery. RESULTS: At minimum 3 years follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in CO THA versus RO THA with respect to the Oxford hip score [median 42(6.25) versus 41(5.5), P = .914]; FJS [89 (9.25) versus 86 (9), P = .065], and University of California at Los Angeles score [median 7.5 (3) versus 7 (2), P = .381]. None of the study patients had dislocations or underwent revision surgery within 3 years follow-up. CONCLUSION: The previously reported improvement in accuracy of acetabular component in this study population did not translate to statistically significant improvements in PROMs. Patients in both groups achieved excellent PROMs and there was a trend towards higher FJS scores postoperatively in the RO THA group that did not reach statistical significance. Further studies are needed to assess the significance of these findings on longer-term clinical outcomes and implant survivorships, and also to explore the impact of the enhanced RO THA workflow and functional implant positioning on these outcomes.