Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 May 18;61(5):912.
doi: 10.3390/medicina61050912.

Preoperative Central Sensitization Worsens Pain and Dissatisfaction Following Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Affiliations

Preoperative Central Sensitization Worsens Pain and Dissatisfaction Following Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Man-Soo Kim et al. Medicina (Kaunas). .

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Central sensitization (CS) has been identified as a significant factor influencing persistent pain and dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, its effect on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains largely unexplored. Unlike TKA, UKA preserves most native knee structures, with less bone cut, leading to different postoperative pain mechanisms. Nevertheless, the revision rate for unexplained pain following UKA is higher than after TKA. This study investigates the influence of preoperative CS on pain and dissatisfaction after UKA. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 121 patients who underwent primary UKA for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. Patients were screened for CS preoperatively using the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) and categorized into a CS group (CSI ≥ 40; n = 26) and a non-CS group (CSI < 40; n = 95). Clinical outcomes, including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and patient satisfaction, were assessed at the 2-year postoperative follow-up visit. A multivariate regression analysis was used to determine the risk factors for postoperative dissatisfaction. Results: The CS group reported significantly worse postoperative WOMAC pain, function, and total scores than the non-CS group (all p < 0.05). FJS was also significantly worse in the CS group than in the non-CS group (64.4 vs. 72.7, respectively, p = 0.005). Patient satisfaction was significantly lower in the CS group than in the non-CS group (65.4% vs. 95.8%, respectively, p < 0.001). The multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that patients with a CSI score ≥ 40 had an 11.349-fold increased likelihood of dissatisfaction after UKA (95% CI: 2.315-55.626, p = 0.003). Conclusions: This study underscores the importance of recognizing CS as a critical determinant of postoperative pain and functional recovery following UKA. Patients with high CSI scores experience greater pain, increased joint awareness, and overall poorer satisfaction despite technically successful surgeries.

Keywords: central sensitization; dissatisfaction; pain; unicomparmental knee arthroplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant flow diagram. CS: Central Sensitization, CSI: Central Sensitization Inventory.

Similar articles

References

    1. Digennaro V., Ferri R., Panciera A., Bordini B., Cecchin D., Benvenuti L., Traina F., Faldini C. Coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification and its impact on medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Exposing a unexpected external shift of limb mechanical axis in case of prearthritic constitutional valgus alignment: A retrospective radiographic study. Knee Surg. Relat. Res. 2024;36:14. doi: 10.1186/s43019-024-00217-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Koshino T., Sato K., Umemoto Y., Akamatsu Y., Kumagai K., Saito T. Clinical results of unicompartmental arthroplasty for knee osteoarthritis using a tibial component with screw fixation. Int. Orthop. 2015;39:1085–1091. doi: 10.1007/s00264-014-2564-y. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vasso M., Antoniadis A., Helmy N. Update on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current indications and failure modes. EFORT Open Rev. 2018;3:442–448. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170060. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vasso M., Del Regno C., Perisano C., D′Amelio A., Corona K., Schiavone Panni A. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: Ten year results. Int. Orthop. 2015;39:2341–2346. doi: 10.1007/s00264-015-2809-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baker P.N., Petheram T., Avery P.J., Gregg P.J., Deehan D.J. Revision for unexplained pain following unicompartmental and total knee replacement. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 2012;94:e126. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00791. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources