No clinical outcome difference between varus phenotypes after medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy at 2 years follow-up

Abstract

Purpose: Clinical studies regarding medial open-wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO) often analyse a large group of mechanical varus knees rather than differentiating for its primary varus-inducing component. This study aims to compare the radiological and clinical outcomes of the most prevalent varus malalignment phenotypes using the coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification. Methods: MOWHTO cases with minimal 2-year clinical follow-up were retrospectively selected from a knee osteotomy database (2016–2020). Based on the medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), subjects were allocated to the correct CPAK phenotype pre- and postoperatively. Clinical outcomes were the numeric rating scale (NRS), the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) and the therapeutic response rate (TRR) at 2-year follow-up. Inter-observer correlation coefficient (ICC) and unpaired student t test were performed for cross-phenotype comparison. Results: One hundred thirty-five (135) subjects were found eligible (53.0 years old ±9.6 [19–77], 72% male, 53% left-sided). The most prevalent preoperative phenotype was CPAK 1 (n = 70 (52%)) and the postoperative phenotype was CPAK 6 (n = 66 (49%)). All CPAK phenotypes improved significantly relative to baseline but cross-phenotype comparison yielded no significant differences in clinical outcome. The TRR at 2 years was 67% for CPAK 1, 69% for CPAK 2 and 87% for CPAK 4. The TRR for CPAK 6 was 64% compared with 80% for CPAK 9, which was not significantly different. Conclusion: At 2-year follow-up, no clinically significant differences are observed between different CPAK phenotypes. Accurate MOWHTO corrections provide significant clinical improvement even in the femoral-driven varus knee and the constitutional varus knee dominated by intra-articular wear. The clinical indication for MOWHTO performance should not be reduced to the medial arthritic varus knee with underlying tibial varus alone. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective comparative study.