Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: To (1) establish cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) values and legacy knee-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after isolated medial meniscal posterior root tear (MMPRT) repair using the transtibial pull-out repair technique; (2) determine achievement rates; and (3) analyze correlations among scores.

Methods: Patients undergoing primary isolated MMPRT transtibial pull-out repair with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative data were analyzed. PROMs included the PROMIS-Pain Interference (PI) score, PROMIS-Physical Function (PF) score, PROMIS-Depression (D) score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Jr (KOOS Jr), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. Paired 2-tailed Student t tests evaluated PROM changes from preoperatively to postoperatively, with the level of significance at P < .05. MCID thresholds were determined using the distribution-based method, whereas PASS thresholds were anchor based. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare PROM scores.

Results: Sixty-eight patients (mean age, 57.2 ± 9.7 years; 75.0% female sex; mean body mass index, 32.2 ± 6.1) were included and followed up for 32.9 ± 10.6 months. From preoperatively to final follow-up, all PROMs significantly improved (P < .05). The MCID thresholds and achievement rates were 6.5 and 63%, respectively, for the PROMIS-PF score; -5.7 and 69%, respectively, for the PROMIS-PI score; -4.8 and 50%, respectively, for the PROMIS-D score; 10.5 and 87%, respectively, for the IKDC score; and 10.3 and 75%, respectively, for the KOOS Jr. The PASS thresholds and rates were 47.8 and 59%, respectively, for the PROMIS-PF score; 53.6 and 54%, respectively, for the PROMIS-PI score; 40.5 and 49%, respectively, for the PROMIS-D score; 67.7 and 66%, respectively, for the IKDC score; and 72.3 and 66%, respectively, for the KOOS Jr. The strongest correlations were observed between the PROMIS-PI score and the KOOS Jr (r = -0.687) and IKDC score (r = -0.660). The PROMIS-D score showed the weakest correlations with the KOOS Jr and IKDC score (r = 0.395 and r = -0.399, respectively). Knee-specific PROMs showed a strong correlation with each other (r = 0.710).

Conclusions: This study establishes cohort-specific MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS subscale scores, IKDC score, and KOOS Jr at a minimum 2-year follow-up after isolated transtibial pull-out MMPRT repair. At 2 years, the MCID and PASS were achieved by 63% and 59% of patients, respectively, for the PROMIS-PF score; 69% and 54%, respectively, for the PROMIS-PI score; and 50% and 49%, respectively, for the PROMIS-D score. For the IKDC score and KOOS Jr, the MCID rates were 87% and 75%, respectively, and the PASS rates were 66% and 66%, respectively.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2025.04.014DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ikdc score
28
score
22
transtibial pull-out
16
pass thresholds
16
score koos
16
promis-pi score
16
promis-d score
16
pull-out repair
12
promis-pf score
12
patient-reported outcomes
8

Similar Publications

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) versus ACLR + lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) at mid-term follow-up in a low activity population based on the Tegner activity scale (TAS ≤ 4).

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis comparing patients with a pre-injury TAS ≤ 4 who underwent primary isolated ACLR versus ACLR + LEAPs between 2012 and 2022. Propensity score matching based on age, sex, and presence of meniscal injury was used to establish two groups: ACLR alone and ACLR with LEAP.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and Hamstring (HT) autografts are commonly used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Concerns exist regarding postoperative anterior knee pain (AKP) and kneeling discomfort with BPTB grafts. However, many studies solely report the presence/absence of anterior knee pain, without assessing its clinical significance in terms of functional limitation or impact on quality of life.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: The extent of change in Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROs) required to meet surgeon-defined satisfactory outcomes after isolated Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction (MPFL-R) has not been reported. The primary aim of the study was to define the threshold value of maximal outcome improvement (MOI) in PROs associated with surgeon-defined satisfactory postoperative outcomes. The secondary aim was to identify the most effective PRO in predicting these outcomes and to evaluate the factors associated with it.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses the comparative effectiveness of home-based and supervised rehabilitation protocols following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, with a focus on functional recovery and muscle strength.

Methods: Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024585478) and following PRISMA guidelines, we searched Web of Science, PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane. For the quality assessment, the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias (RoB) tool was used.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Remnant Preservation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Versus Non-Preservation Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Orthop Surg

September 2025

Sports Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Department of Orthopedics and Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

To manage anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, both remnant-preserving anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and standard ACLR without remnant preservation are applied. This study aims to systematically evaluate clinical outcomes of remnant-preserving versus standard ACLR techniques by analyzing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were used to identify studies published from January 2000 to November 2024.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF