What Factors Predict Patient Dissatisfaction After Contemporary Medial Opening-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy?

Background: Although current advances in surgical techniques have improved outcomes of the medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO), the factors associated with patient dissatisfaction remain unclear. Thus, the purpose of this study is to identify risk factors for patient dissatisfaction following contemporary MOWHTO. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data on 140 consecutive MOWHTO patients using an anatomical locking plate with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patient demographics, pain Visual Analogue Scale, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade, activity level, articular cartilage and meniscal status, hip-knee-ankle angle, change in alignment, and postoperative weight-bearing line ratio were recorded. Patients were categorized using the New Knee Society Score into satisfied (satisfaction score ≥20) or dissatisfied (satisfaction score <20) groups. Patient and surgical factors were compared between the groups by the identified predictors. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to analyze risk factors, including K-L grade IV medial osteoarthritis (OA), preoperative pain Visual Analogue Scale, total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, postoperative hip-knee-ankle angle, change in alignment, and partial meniscectomy. Results: Of the 140 patients, 24 (17.1%) were dissatisfied with their results. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that only K-L grade IV medial OA was statistically associated with patient dissatisfaction following MOWHTO (odds ratio 4.911, 95% confidence interval 1.820-13.256, P <.01). Conclusion: Severe medial OA was an independent risk factor for dissatisfaction following contemporary MOWHTO using a rigid locking plate. Surgeons should take this into consideration when counseling and choosing surgical options in MOWHTO candidates with severe medial OA. Level of Evidence: Level III.