Improvements in Noise Symptoms, Forgotten Joint Scores, and Functional Outcomes With Greater Time Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an impactful procedure with goals that include pain reduction and improved function, with low levels of prosthesis awareness. The purpose of this study was to determine if patients reported prosthetic noise and noise-related symptoms diminished over the course of time after TKA. METHODS: This study was a single institutional, retrospective study of patients who underwent primary unilateral TKA from 2018 to 2021. The TKAs were performed by four high-volume, fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons. Patients had similar baseline characteristics. Patients completed a survey consisting of four Likert scale questions related to prosthetic noise generation, the Forgotten Joint Score, and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement. Data were compared between patients who had undergone TKA one to two years earlier (N = 305) and those who had TKA three to four years prior to evaluation (N = 177). RESULTS: After more time with TKA, patients had significantly lower reports of hearing noise (31.1 versus 43.6%; P = 0.009) and feeling prosthetic noise-related symptoms (28.2 versus 40.3%; P = 0.010). Furthermore, after more time from TKA, patients had significantly higher satisfaction regarding noise-generation (65.5 versus 50.2%; P = 0.012), postoperative Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement scores (80.9 versus 75.9; P = 0.005), and Forgotten Joint Scores (65.4 versus 53.8; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As more time passes after TKA, patients observe less prosthetic noise generation and have lower levels of prosthesis awareness and greater satisfaction than those who had surgery more recently. It is unclear whether these differences represent real improvement or acclimation to noise over time.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

No difference of gait parameters in patients with image-free robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared to a conventional technique: early results of a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: In recent studies, robotic-assisted surgical techniques for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) have demonstrated superior implant positioning and limb alignment compared to a conventional technique. However, the impact of the robotic-assisted technique on clinical and functional outcomes is less clear. The aim of this study was to compare the gait parameters of UKA performed with conventional and image-free robotic-assisted techniques. METHODS: This prospective, single-center study included 66 medial UKA, randomized to a robotic-assisted (n = 33) or conventional technique (n = 33). Gait knee kinematics was assessed on a treadmill at 6 months to identify changes in gait characteristics (walking speed, each degree-of-freedom: flexion-extension, abduction-adduction, internal-external rotation, and anterior-posterior displacement). Clinical results were assessed at 6 months using the IKS score and the Forgotten Joint Score. Implants position was assessed on post-operative radiographs. RESULTS: Post-operatively, the whole gait cycle was not significantly different between groups. In both groups, there was a significant improvement in varus deformity between the pre- and post-operative gait cycle. There was no significant difference between the two groups in clinical scores, implant position, revision, and complication rates. CONCLUSION: No difference of gait parameters could be identified between medial UKA performed with image-free robotic-assisted technique or with conventional technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective randomized controlled trial.

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.

Mobile-Bearing has no Benefit Over Fixed-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty in Joint Awareness and Crepitus: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Given higher component conformity, rotational availability of polyethylene insert, and more physiologic patellofemoral tracking, mobile-bearing (MB) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is supposed to offer advantages in joint perception and crepitus. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether MB TKA offers superior outcomes over fixed-bearing (FB) TKA in terms of joint awareness and crepitus. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, controlled trial included 49 FB and 49 MB TKAs that shared the same posterior-stabilized femoral component. Primary outcomes included joint awareness assessed with the Forgotten Joint Score and crepitus graded according to severity and sound at 3 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were the range of motion, the Knee Society Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, component position, and joint line level on radiographs. RESULTS: The Forgotten Joint Score showed no significant difference between the FB (67 points; range, 0-100) and MB groups (63 points; range, 13-100) (P = .440). For crepitus, no significant differences were found in the overall incidence rate (FB group, 18%; MB group, 12%; P = .386) and grade (grade 1, 6 versus 5; grade 2, 2 versus 1; grade 3, 1 versus 0, respectively). There were no significant differences in range of motion, Knee Society Score, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, as well as radiographic outcomes between the two groups (all, P > .05). CONCLUSION: MB TKA offers no benefits in terms of joint awareness and crepitus compared with FB TKA at mean 3 years postoperatively. The theoretical advantages of MB TKA have yet to be demonstrated in practice, leaving the selection of bearing type to the surgeon's judgment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

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.

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.

Joint awareness and return to pre-injury level of activities after ACL reconstruction in athletes vs non-athletes.

PURPOSE: The outcome of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the non-athlete population is under-reported. The study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of ACLR in the non-athlete and athlete population by patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)- International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Lysholm knee scoring scale, Forgotten joint score (FJS-12) and return to pre-injury activity level. The study also correlated the FJS-12 score with other commonly used PROM's (IKDC and Lysholm). METHODS: This was a prospective comparative study including patients undergoing ACLR. Patients were divided into two groups. Group-1 (non-athletes) and Group-2 (athletes, defined as those with pre-injury Tegner activity level > 5). Demographic profile, management of associated meniscal injury, perioperative and midterm complications were noted. All patients had 24 months follow-up. Knee laxity assessment by pivot shift test, functional outcome scores (Lysholm and IKDC) and FJS-12 were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: Group 1 and 2 included 69 and 47 participants, respectively, (total 116 patients). The mean age of group 1 was significantly higher than group 2 (33.1 ± 8.0 vs 25.0 ± 4.9 years; p < 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in PROMs and FJS-12 scores between the groups at any follow-up. Return to pre-injury Tegner activity level post-ACLR was 88.4% (n = 61) and 46.8% (n = 22) in group 1 and 2, respectively (p). The ceiling effect in FJS-12, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were achieved by 9.3%, 19.5%, and 34.7% of patients (n = 116), respectively, at 2-year follow-up. The ceiling effect of FJS-12, Lysholm, and IKDC scores between the groups at final follow-up was not statistically significant (p = 1, p = .524, p = .09, respectively). CONCLUSION: The functional outcome of ACLR was comparable between athletes and non-athletes. FJS-12 has a lower ceiling effect and better discriminatory power than Lysholm and IKDC scores. FJS-12 score can be satisfactorily used in ACLR to observe and monitor changes in patient satisfaction and outcome. LEVEL OF STUDY: II, Prospective comparative study.

Correlation of patient-reported numbness around surgical scars with patient-reported outcome measures and joint awareness after knee replacement: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Knee replacement is a very effective and indispensable treatment option for end-stage knee arthritis, and the number of cases has been increasing worldwide. A replaced knee joint without patient joint awareness is thought to be the ultimate goal of artificial knees. Joint awareness reportedly correlates with patient satisfaction. Although numbness around a replaced knee is a minor but common problem, its effect on postoperative outcome is controversial. Joint awareness also is sensitive to subtle abnormalities of the joint, so it must be negatively affected by numbness. Although numbness is minor, it cannot be ignored to further improve knee replacement outcomes. This study investigated the relationship between patient-reported numbness and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including joint awareness, and kneeling. We developed a numbness score based on a 5-point Likert scale on frequency of numbness, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.76 and higher scores indicating less numbness. METHODS: The numbness score, New Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12), and other clinical and radiological data from 311 patients (394 primary knee replacements) were analyzed. Kneeling ability was evaluated by using kneeling-specific items in the KSS (KSS-Kneeling). RESULTS: No numbness was found in 170 knees (43.1%), and some degree of numbness was found in the remaining 224 knees (56.9%). The numbness score showed weak-to-moderate correlations with KSS-Symptoms (r = 0.44), KSS-Satisfaction (r = 0.41), KSS-Activities (r = 0.29), and all KOOS subscales (r = 0.23-0.44), and FJS-12 (r = 0.42). Multiple regression analyses suggested that midline incision positively affected the numbness score over the anteromedial incision (p = 0.04) and that a better numbness score (p = 0.001), male sex (p < 0.0001), and better postoperative knee flexion angle (0.04) positively affected kneeling. CONCLUSIONS: The numbness score positively correlated with PROMs and positively affected kneeling. Knee replacements performed via an anteromedial incision may be at higher risk for numbness.

Tibial joint line orientation has no effect on joint awareness after mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Joint line orientation (JLO) plays an important role in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but its influence on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine JLO impact as measured by the forgotten joint score (FJS-12). The hypothesis was that restoring the joint line (JL) parallel to the floor would influence joint awareness favorably, i.e., allow the patient to forget about the joint in daily living. METHODS: All computer-navigated primary TKAs using a cemented, cruciate-retaining (CR) design implanted between January 2018 and September 2019 were reviewed in this retrospective single-center analysis. Primary endpoints were: clinical [range of motion (ROM)], and patient-reported (FJS-12) and radiographical outcomes [tibia joint line angle (TJLA), hip knee axis (HKA), mechanical medial proximal tibia angle (mMPTA) as well as mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA)]. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (mean age: 70.3 ± 9.7 years, mean BMI: 29.7 ± 5.2 kg/m2) were included. Postoperative ROM averaged 118.7 ± 9.6°. The mean FJS-12 improved from 16.4 ± 15.3 (preoperatively) to 89.4 ± 16.9 (1-year follow-up; p < 0.001). Clinical outcomes and PROs did not correlate with JLO (p = n.s.). Cluster analysis using six measures revealed that a medially opened TJLA was associated with significantly better postoperative FJS-12. CONCLUSION: Tibial JLO was found to have no effect on PROs. Considering the JLO in the coronal plane alone probably has questionable clinical relevance. Lower limb alignment should be assessed in all three planes and correlated with the clinical outcome. LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 is valid and reliable to assess prosthesis awareness.

PURPOSE: Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) recorded an increased incidence of around 30% per year in the United States. Patient's experience and satisfaction after surgery were traditionally assessed by pre, and post-surgical scores and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) scales. Traditional scales as Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) reported high ceiling effect. Patients treated by UKA usually perform well; therefore, it is necessary to have a PROMs' scale with a low ceiling effect as the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12). PROMs have to be validated in the local language to be used. This study aims to perform a psychometric validation of the Italian version of FJS-12 for UKA for the first time. METHODS: Between January 2019 and October 2019, 44 patients were included. Each patient completed both the FJS-12 Italian version and the WOMAC Italian version in preoperative follow-up, after 2-week and 1-month, 3-month, and 6-month postoperative follow-up. Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC) were calculated to evaluate the reliability. The Pearson coefficient was used to assess validity. The Effect Size (ES) was used to test the responsiveness. RESULTS: A range of Cronbach's α between 0.90 and 0.95 indicated good internal consistency for the FJS-12. The test-retest reliability was acceptable (i.e., the ICC was higher than 0.7) at each follow-up. The Pearson correlation coefficient between the FJS-12 and WOMAC was - 0.11 (n.s.) at preoperative follow-up, r = 0.47 (P = 0.001) at 1 month, r = 0.57 (P < 0.001) at 3 months, and r = 0.57 (P < 0.001) at 6 months. Therefore, except for the preoperative period, the validity of the FJS-12 score was assessed. CONCLUSION: The FJS-12 represents a valid and reliable tool with a low ceiling effect to assess the outcomes improvement in UKA patients. Therefore, validating and translating this score in different languages could help perform more accurate studies on outcomes after UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Residual varus alignment can reduce joint awareness, restore joint parallelism, and preserve the soft tissue envelope during total knee arthroplasty for varus osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: The objectives were to compare the coronal joint configuration of the knee joints, coronal gap imbalances requiring substantial medial release, and patient-reported outcomes, including the forgotten joint score, between knees in which residual varus alignment was intentionally allowed according to an individualised lower limb analysis and those with mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty for varus osteoarthritis. METHODS: Consecutive primary navigated total knee arthroplasty procedures for varus osteoarthritis were retrospectively reviewed. The study cohort was stratified based on whether residual varus alignment was intentionally allowed. Propensity-score matching was performed based on the baseline characteristics, including demographic characteristics, preoperative radiological measurements, and the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (mechanical alignment group vs residual varus group). The patient-reported outcomes and coronal joint line orientation of the knee (relative to the ground) and ankle were evaluated. Coronal gap differences and coronal gap imbalances were analysed using intraoperative gap measurements. RESULTS: Relative to the ground and ankle, the postoperative knee joint line orientation slanted down laterally in the mechanical alignment group (- 3.05˚ ± 1.62, relative to the ground; - 2.65˚ ± 1.56, relative to the ankle joint), but was parallel in the residual varus group (- 0.75˚ ± 1.59, relative to the ground; - 0.95˚ ± 1.71, relative to the ankle joint). Coronal gap differences at extension and the proportion of coronal gap imbalances requiring substantial medial release were 1.27 ± 1.53 and 6% in the residual varus group and 2.32 ± 1.24 and 15% in the mechanical alignment group. Postoperatively, the residual varus group showed higher Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index scores and total forgotten joint scores than the mechanical alignment group (6.97 ± 4.75 vs. 10.31 ± 5.74 and 56.42 ± 12.85 vs. 45.69 ± 14.49, respectively). CONCLUSION: Intentionally allowed residual varus alignment with individualised analysis of lower limb alignment restored the parallel joint line of the knees, preserved the soft tissue envelope, and reduced joint awareness after total knee arthroplasty for varus osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level III retrospective case-control study.

Validation of Single-Outcome Questionnaire in Primary TKA and THA.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures can be used to evaluate post-operative health care quality and patient satisfaction. The Patient's Joint Perception (PJP) question gathers a single patient-reported outcome to measure how patients appraise their joint. This study compares PJP to the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) at 21 months post-operation to assess its value. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed at an orthopedic specialty hospital for patients who completed both PJP and FJS questionnaires in 2020-2021 and underwent either a unilateral elective primary Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) or Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Spearman's correlation coefficients and P-values were calculated to determine external validity of PJP. Floor and ceiling effects were analyzed and considered present if ≥ 15% of patients achieved the worst or best score (0-4 for PJP and 0-100 for FJS). RESULTS: In total, 534 patients (327 THA and 207 TKA) were surveyed at 21 months post-operation. External validity against FJS was assessed for both TKA (r = 0.66, P < .01) and THA (r = 0.69, P < .01). For TKA, the floor and ceiling effects were 0.97% and 25.12% for PJP and 3.86% and 4.83% for FJS, respectively. For THA, the floor and ceiling effects were 0.92% and 50.46% for PJP and 2.47% and 20.50% for FJS, respectively. CONCLUSION: The PJP was correlated with FJS moderately for both TKA and THA and can be collected with lesser burden. However, ceiling effects were higher in both TKA and THA for PJP compared to FJS. Further studies are needed to investigate the questionnaires at additional time points and to evaluate the implications of high ceiling effects.

Outcomes are Better With a Medial-Stabilized vs a Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Implanted With Kinematic Alignment.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus whether a posterior-stabilized (PS) total knee device is superior to a more congruent, cruciate-substituting, medial-stabilized device (MS). This study compared the clinical outcomes of these devices. The primary hypothesis was that the clinical outcomes would be better in the MS group implanted with kinematic alignment. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, single-center Level 1 study compared the outcomes of 99 patients who received a PS device and 101 patients who received an MS device implanted with kinematic alignment. Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent were obtained. Clinical and radiographic assessments were performed preoperatively, 6 weeks, 6 months, and annually. RESULTS: All subjects reached the minimum follow-up of 2 years. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics, preoperative scores, or alignment (preoperative or postoperative). Tourniquet time was 7.24% longer for the PS group (40.28 min vs 37.56 min, P < .0086). There were significant differences between groups for the 1-year and 2-year Knee Society scores, Forgotten Joint Score, and ROM; in every case favoring the MS group. The FJS was 68.3 in the MS group at 2 years and 58.3 in the PS group (P = .02). The maximum flexion at 2 years was 132° in the MS group and 124° in the PS group (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The clinical outcomes of the MS group at 1 and 2 years were better. At the minimum 2-year follow-up, the results demonstrate the superiority of the medial-stabilized device in terms of multiple clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the Forgotten Joint Score in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: In order to better understand the clinical benefits of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and improve the interpretability of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), the establishment of a meaningful change in score is necessary. The purpose of this study is to determine the threshold of the FJS-12 for detecting the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) following primary TKA. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent elective, primary TKA and answered both the FJS-12 and the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey, Joint Replacement KOOS, JR surveys 1-year postoperatively. The questionnaires were administered via a web-based electronic application. KOOS, JR score was used as the anchor. The anchor for PASS calculation should relate pain, physical function, and patient satisfaction. Two statistical methods were employed: (1) the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve point; (2) 75th percentile of the cumulative percentage curve of patients who had the KOOS, JR score difference larger than the cut-off value. RESULTS: This study included 457 patients. The mean 1-year FJS-12 score was 42.6 ± 27.8. The mean 1-year KOOS, JR score was 68.0 ± 17.2. A high positive correlation between FJS-12 and KOOS, JR was found (r = 0.72, P < .001) making the KOOS, JR a valid external anchor. The threshold score of the FJS-12 which maximized the sensitivity and specificity for detecting a PASS was 33.3 (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI [0.74, 0.83]). The cut-off value computed with the 75th percentile approach was 77.1 (95% CI [73.9, 81.5]). CONCLUSION: The PASS threshold for the FJS-12 was 33.3 and 77.1 at 1-year follow-up after primary TKA using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and 75th percentile approaches, respectively. These values can be used to assess the successful achievement of a forgotten joint. LEVEL III EVIDENCE: Retrospective Cohort Study.