The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) started collecting data on total hip arthroplasty (THA) in 1987. Very long-term results of implants for THA are scarce. We aimed to show long-term results for the three most used femoral stems, operated from 1987. We included the uncemented Corail femoral stem (n=66,309) and the cemented Exeter stem (n=35,050) both of which are currently in frequent use. In addition, we included the Charnley stem (n=32,578, in use until 2014). To ensure comparable conditions, stems fixated with low viscosity cement and stems revised due to infections were excluded. Differences in risk of revision (all reasons and stem revisions) were assessed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses with adjustment for possible confounding from age, sex and diagnosis (OA, other). Stem revision was defined as a revision caused by loosening of the stem, dislocation, osteolysis in the femur, or periprosthetic femur fracture, and in which the femoral component was removed or exchanged. The median and max follow-up for Corail, Exeter and Charnley were 6.3 (33.1), 8.0 (34.2) and 13.1 (34.3) respectively. Thirty years survival estimates for Corail, Exeter and Charnley stems were 88.6% (CI:85.8–90.9%), 86.7% (83.7–89.2%) and 87.1% (85.4–88.5%) respectively with stem revision as endpoint, and 56.1% (CI:53.1–59.1%), 73.3% (70.5–76.1%) and 80.2% (78.4–82.0%) with all THA revisions as endpoint. Compared to the Corail, the Exeter (HRR=1.3, CI:1.2–1.4) and the Charnley (HRR=1.9, CI:1.7–2.1) had a significant higher risk of stem revision. Women 75 years and older had better results with the cemented stems. Analyses accounting for competing risk from other causes of revision did not alter the findings. The uncemented Corail stem performed well in terms of stem revisions for stem-related revision causes compared to two frequently used cemented stems with very long follow-up. The differences between the three stems were small

Vitamin E-doped cross-linked polyethylene (VEPE) has encouraged the use of larger heads in thinner liners in total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, there are concerns about wear and mechanical failure of the thin liner, especially when metal heads are used. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to investigate if the use of a large metal head in a thin VEPE liner would increase polyethylene wear compared with a standard 32-mm metal head and to compare periacetabular radiolucencies and patient-reported outcomes in THA. 96 candidates for uncemented THA were randomly allocated to either the largest possible metal head (36–44 mm) that could be fitted in the thinnest available VEPE liner (intervention group) or a standard 32-mm metal head (control group). The primary outcome was proximal head penetration (PHP) measured with model-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA). Secondary outcomes were periacetabular radiolucencies and patient-reported outcomes. The mid-term results of the trial at 5 years are presented. Median total PHP (interquartile range) was -0.04 mm (−0.12 to 0.02) in the intervention group and -0.03 mm (=0.14 to 0.05) in the control group (p=0.691). The rates of periacetabular radiolucencies were 1/44 and 4/42 (p=0.197), respectively. Patient-reported hip function and health-related quality of life did not differ between the groups, but participants in the intervention group reported a higher level of activity (median UCLA rank 7 vs 6, p=0.020). There were 5 revisions caused by dislocations (2), periprosthetic fracture (1), stem subsidence (1), or iliopsoas impingement (1). Large metal heads in thin VEPE liners did not increase liner wear and were not associated with liner failure 5 years after THA

The purpose was to determine the lifetime risk of re-operation due to specific complications related to dual mobility using re-operation as a competing risk, excluding loosening, periprosthetic fracture, and infection. 1503 mono-block dual mobility total hip arthroplasty (DM-THAs). Defining the re-operation when anesthesia (for dislocation) and revision when the implant changed. Surgery (801 for primary, 702 for revision with 201 for recurrent dislocation and 501 for loosening) performed between 1990 and 2020 in average 81-year-old (range 50–102) patients, with 522 living patients at 10 years follow-up. During the first month, outer dislocation (60 cases; 4%) was the cause re-operation (1% among primary and 6 % among revisions). Twenty-four intra-prosthetic dislocations (IPD) were an iatrogenic consequence of a failed closed reduction (reduction maneuver dissociating the inner head) with 1.6% revision. Between 1 month and 1 year, 22 new outer dislocations, while 25 of the 60 “first month” dislocations had recurrent dislocation. Fifteen other IPDs as iatrogenic consequences were observed. At one year, the cumulative revision was 3% (49 of 82 dislocations). Between 1- 10-year FU, 132 other dislocations, and 45 other revisions for dislocations were observed. Corrosion was another cause of revision (37 cases): between the cobalt-chromium shell and the femoral neck (23 hips), or 14 crevice corrosion between the trunnion and the metal head (trunnion damage). In summary, at 10-year: dislocation first cause of re-operation (214 anesthesia, 14%), while among 131 revisions (8.9 %) the 55 iatrogenic intra-prosthetic dislocations were the first revision cause before 39 recurrent dislocations and 37 corrosions. The 522 patients followed ten years or more had a 15% risk revision due to DM specific complications during their lifetime and 10% more risk associated with loosening (6%), periprosthetic fracture (2%) and infection (2%)

Aim. Previous publications have suggested that the incidence of revisions due to infection after THA is increasing. We performed updated time-trend analyses of risk and timing of revision due to infection after primary THAs in the Nordic countries during the period 2004–2018. Methods. 569,463 primary THAs reported to the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association from 2004 through 2018 were studied. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence interval by Cox regression with the first revision due to infection after primary THA as endpoint. The risk of revision was investigated. In addition, we explored changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection. Results. 5,653 (1.0%) were revised due to infection. The risk of revision due to infection increased through the study period. Compared to the period 2004–2008, the aHRs were 1.4 (95%CI 1.3–1.5) for 2009–2013, and 1.9 (1.7–2.0) for 2014–2018. We found an increased risk in all four Nordic countries. Compared to 2004–2008, the aHR due to infection 0–30 days after THA was 2.5 (2.1–2.9) for 2009–2013 and 3.4 (3.0–3.9) for 2013–2018. The aHR of revision due to infection 31–90 days after THA was 1.5 (1.3–1.9) for 2009–2013 and 2.5 (2.1–3.0) for 2013–2018, compared to 2004–2008. Beyond 91 days after THA, the risk of revision due to infection was stable over the whole study period. Interpretation. The risk of revision due to deep infection after THA nearly doubled throughout the period 2004–2018. This increase was mainly due to an increased risk of early revisions. The cause for these changes may be multifactorial (patient selection, diagnostics, revision strategy, completeness of reporting, etc.), are not possible to disclose in the present study, and warrants further research

Aims

In 2015, we published the results of our ceramic-on-metal (CoM) total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed between October 2007 and July 2009 with a mean follow-up of 34 months (23 to 45) and a revision rate of 3.1%. The aim of this paper is to present the longer-term outcomes.

Aims

Pelvic discontinuity is a rare but increasingly common complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This single-centre study evaluated the performance of custom-made triflange acetabular components in acetabular reconstruction with pelvic discontinuity by determining: 1) revision and overall implant survival rates; 2) discontinuity healing rate; and 3) Harris Hip Score (HHS).

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate medium- to long-term outcomes and complications of the Stanmore Modular Individualised Lower Extremity System (SMILES) rotating hinge implant in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) at a tertiary unit. It is hypothesized that this fully cemented construct leads to satisfactory clinical outcomes. Methods. A retrospective consecutive study of all patients who underwent a rTKA using the fully cemented SMILES rotating hinge prosthesis between 2005 to 2018. Outcome measures included aseptic loosening, reoperations, revision for any cause, complications, and survivorship. Patients and implant survivorship data were identified through both prospectively collected local hospital electronic databases and linked data from the National Joint Registry/NHS Personal Demographic Service. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used at ten years. Results. Overall, 69 consecutive patients (69 knees) were included with a median age of 78 years (interquartile range 69 to 84), and there were 46 females (66.7%). Indications were septic revisions in 26 (37.7%), and aseptic aetiology in the remining 43 (62.3%). The mean follow-up was 9.7 years (4 to 18), and the overall complication was rate was 7.24%, all with patellofemoral complications. Failure rate with ‘any cause revision’ was 5.8%. There was one case of aseptic loosening of the femoral component. At ten years, 17/69 patients (24.63%) had died, and implant survivorship was 92.2%. Conclusion. In our experience, the SMILES rotating hinge prosthesis achieves satisfactory long-term outcomes with ten-year implant survivorship of 92.2% and a patellofemoral complication rate of 7.24%. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):776–781

Aims

Despite multiple trials and case series on hip hemiarthroplasty designs, guidance is still lacking on which implant to use. One particularly deficient area is long-term outcomes. We present over 1,000 consecutive cemented Thompson’s hemiarthroplasties over a ten-year period, recording all accessible patient and implant outcomes.

Background. Substance abuse and dependence is thought to have a strongly negative impact on surgical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of drug misuse on total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision incidence, revision causes, and time to revision by analyzing the Medicare database between 2005–2012. Methods. A retrospective review of the Medicare database within the PearlDiver Supercomputer (Warsaw, IN) for TKA and revisions was performed utilizing Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Disease (ICD) ninth revision codes. Drug misuse was subdivided into cocaine, cannabis, opioids, sedative/hypnotic/anxiolytic, amphetamines, and alcohol. Time to revision, age, and gender were also investigated. Results. Our query returned 2159221 TKAs and 193024 (8.9%) revisions between 2005–2012. Drug misuse was prevalent in 173513 (8%). Cocaine had the highest revision incidence (13.9%). Cannabis had the fastest average (636.1 days) and median (457 days) time to revision. At 30 and 90 days, cannabis had the greatest rate of revision at 6% and 12% respectively. At 6 months and 1 year, amphetamine had the greatest revision risk at 25% and 40.5% respectively. Infection was the most common cause of revision among all substances. Conclusion. Cocaine misuse holds the highest risk for revision. However cannabis misuse is more likely to require revision sooner, particularly at the 30 and 90 day intervals. Infection was the most common cause of revision regardless of substance misused. Thus it is important to obtain a detailed social history on drug misuse and to be vigilant for postoperative infections in these patients

Ceramic-on-polyethylene (COP) bearings have traditionally been reserved for younger patients that were at high risk of polyethylene wear requiring revision. With the 1999 advent of highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLP), wear with XLP has not been a cause for revision. Simulator studies have not shown a difference in wear comparing COP to metal-on-polyethylene (MOP). Therefore, and considering the additional cost of COP, we have until recently not needed COP. However, a 2012 report of 10 cases that developed an adverse reaction to metal debris generated by head neck corrosion has resulted in COP becoming the most common bearing surface as reported by the American Joint Replacement Registry. This reactionary change has occurred despite the fact that we do not understand the cause, do not know the frequency, if it is more common in some implants than others, and we do not know the additional cost or markup of ceramic heads. One study reported a 3.2% revision prevalence caused by mechanically assisted crevice corrosion (MACC) at the head neck junction of a single manufacturer's implant. Other studies have estimated the frequency to be less than 5%. COST IS THE CONCERN in a value based healthcare environment. Models for and against the wholesale use of COP have been proposed and are based on variables that are unknown, including estimated frequency of the problem and the incrementally higher cost of a ceramic head. I use COP in younger patients that I believe will use their hip for more than 15 years. This is based on my personal experience. I have prospectively followed a series of MOP patients for 5 years and not seen cobalt elevations. I have placed new metal femoral heads on corroded femoral tapers without subsequent failure. I have evaluated the taper junctions of postmortem retrievals and found them virtually free of corrosion. A query of our institutional database for MOP primary hips identified 3012 cases between 2006–2017. Eighty revisions (2.7%) were identified. 2 of the 80 were for MACC representing 2.5% of revisions done on our own patients and 0.07% of our MOP cases. Further, evaluating our most recent all cause 350 revisions (7/2015–10/2017) there were 3 revisions for MACC (0.9%). Each one of us needs to EVALUATE OUR OWN PRACTICE AND MAKE AN EDUCATED, VALUE BASED DECISION whether or not to use COP in all patients

Aims

The main aims were to identify risk factors predictive of a radiolucent line (RLL) around the acetabular component with an interface bioactive bone cement (IBBC) technique in the first year after THA, and evaluate whether these risk factors influence the development of RLLs at five and ten years after THA.

Ceramic-on-polyethylene (COP) bearings have traditionally been reserved for younger patients that were at high risk of polyethylene wear requiring revision. With the 1999 advent of highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLP), wear with XLP has not been a cause for revision. Simulator studies have not shown a difference in wear comparing COP to metal-on-polyethylene (MOP). Therefore, and considering the additional cost of COP, we have until recently not needed COP. However, a 2012 report of 10 cases that developed an adverse reaction to metal debris generated by head neck corrosion has resulted in COP becoming the most common bearing surface as reported by the American Joint Replacement Registry. This reactionary change has occurred despite the fact that we do not understand the cause, do not know the frequency, if it is more common in some implants than others, and we do not know the additional cost or markup of ceramic heads. One study reported a 3.2% revision prevalence caused by mechanically assisted crevice corrosion (MACC) at the head neck junction of a single manufacturer's implant. Other studies have estimated the frequency to be less than 5%. COST IS THE CONCERN in a value based health care environment. Models for and against the wholesale use of COP have been proposed and are based on variables that are unknown, including estimated frequency of the problem and the incremental cost of a ceramic head. I use COP in younger patients that I believe will use their hip for more than 15 years. This is based on my personal experience. I have prospectively followed a series of MOP patients for 5 years and not seen cobalt elevations. I have placed new metal femoral heads on corroded femoral tapers without subsequent failure. I have evaluated the taper junctions of postmortem retrievals and found them virtually free of corrosion. A query of our institutional database for MOP primary hips identified 3012 cases between 2006–2017. Eighty revisions (2.7%) were identified. Two of the 80 were for MACC representing 2.5% of revisions done on our own patients and 0.07% of our MOP cases. Further, evaluating our most recent all cause 350 revisions (7/2015-10/2017) there were 3 revisions for MACC (0.9%). Each one of us needs to EVALUATE OUR OWN PRACTICE AND MAKE AN EDUCATED, VALUE BASED DECISION whether or not to use COP in all patients

The objective of this study was to compare the results of two consecutive series of patients with either intra-medullary uncemented stems (UCS) distal femoral endoprosthetic replacement or the Compress. ®. (CMP) distal femoral implant. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received UCS prosthesis (Group-1: 54 patients) and those who received CMP prosthesis (Group-2: 42 patients).The most frequent diagnosis was osteosarcoma. Age and gender were similar both groups. In Group-1, at a mean follow-up of 144 months, 37 prostheses were still in place. The overall Kaplan-Meier prosthetic survival rates were 79% at five and 62 % at ten years. Most of failures were long term complications. Aseptic loosening was the primary cause of late prosthetic failure. On Cox regression analysis, prosthetic stem diameter under 13mm was a significant negative prognostic factor for prosthetic survival (p=0.016). In Group-2, at a mean follow-up of 84 months, 36 prostheses were still in place. The overall rate of CMP prosthesis survival was 86% at 5 years. All complications were during the first postoperative year, being femoral fracture the main revision cause. The patients who retained the prosthesis had mainly good or excellent MSTS functional results in both groups

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common and extremely beneficial procedure that is being performed more often as the population ages. Current THA follow-up guidelines require large amounts of resources and may not justify their cost with increased patient outcomes. Most problems that would require THA revision will cause symptoms. Late-presenting asymptomatic THAs that are found to require revision are complicated and expensive to address and often lead to poor patient outcomes. Follow-up visits for THA patients are essentially a screening tool to identify asymptomatic THAs that require revision. The rate of asymptomatic THA revision and the subsequent cost of screening for them is not well reported in the literature. Given the relative shortage of orthopaedic resources, efficient use of clinic time should be a priority and inefficient practices should be identified and changed. We calculated the rate of asymptomatic hip revisions over the first twenty years of THA ownership. We further calculated the cost of a single visit to the orthopaedic clinic for follow up of a THA. Finally, we calculated the cost savings of decreasing the follow-up schedule to a total of three visits. The cost savings of foregoing the screening to identify one asymptomatic THA requiring revision is CAD $1.2 million. Asymptomatic THAs requiring revision are rare and, as such, require a large amount of follow up to diagnose. As a screening tool, regular orthopaedic follow up of THA is an inefficient use of resources. Current follow-up guidelines are cost-prohibitive and should be made much less frequent in order to save resources

Long term outcome of cementless femoral stem with use of transtrochanteric approach was evaluated by clinical outcome and radiological change. 37 joints in 33 patients who underwent surgery in our department more than 15 years before (from 1986 to 1993) were studied. Used implants were Omnifit (Fit group, 19 joints: all joints were microstructured) and Ominiflex (Flex group, 18 joints: all joints were microstructured). The preoperative diagnosis was secondary osteoarthritis caused by dysplasia of hip (29 joints), osteonecrosis of femoral head (2 joints), rheumatoid arthritis (4 joints), and others (2 joints). Mean age at surgery was 51 years (Fit group, 54.2 years; Flex group, 50.2 years) and average postoperative follow-up period was 17.8 years (Fit group, 19 years; Flex group, 16.5 years). Clinical outcome was evaluated by Japanese Orthopedic Association hip score (JOA score) and absence or presence of thigh pain. In radiological evaluation, the fixation of implant was evaluated by Engh’s classification and the presence or absence of stress shielding, spot welds, radiolucent line, osteolysis, and sinking were studied. JOA score for Fit and Flex group was significantly improved from 35 to 79.3 points and 37 to 76.9 points, respectively. Improvement of pain and gait ability was marked. Thigh pain was observed in 1 joint only, in the Flex group. Radiological examination for Fit and Flex group showed bone ingrowth 100% and 61% of patients, respectively, showing good fixation for both groups. Radiological sign of Fit and Flex group showed stress shielding in 91% and 84%, spot welds in 73% and 44%, radiolucent line in 12% and 19%, osteolysis in 5.2% and 5%, and sinking in 0% and 11% of patients, respectively. Revision caused by loosening of stem was in only 1 joint in Flex group. For first generation of Omnifit/Omniflex stem, many cases of early loosening caused by surface structure characteristics had been reported. Long-term outcome in our department was relatively good compared to these earlier reports. Good initial placement of femoral component and sufficient canal fill ratio with use of transtrochanteric approach is one factor of this better result

The aim was to identify the acetabular center, fix the acetabular implant, and reconstruct the hip rotation center using the residual Harris fossa and acetabular notch as anatomical markers during revision hip arthroplasty. Osteolysis is commonly found in the acetabulum during hip arthroplasty revision. It causes extensive defects and malformation of the anatomical structure, making correct fixation of a hip prosthesis difficult. We studied the relations of the anatomical positions between the Harris fossa and acetabular notch and the acetabular center (Fig. 1). Vertical distance from the hip rotation center to the teardrop connection and horizontal distance from the hip rotation center to the teardrop were measured on preoperative and postoperative radiographs. Vertical distance increased from 14.22±3.39 mm preoperatively to 32.64±4.51 mm postoperatively (t=3.65, P<0.05) and the horizontal distance from 25.13±3.46 mm to 32.87±4.73 mm (t=2.72, P<0.05). Altogether, 28 patients underwent revision hip arthroplasty based on the Paprosky classification for bone loss. The anatomical hip center was identified using the residual Harris fossa and acetabular notch as anatomical markers during revision hip arthroplasty. Based on these relations, we were able to place the hip prosthesis correctly. After surgery, restoration of the anatomical hip center was accomplished based on data obtained from radiographs(Fig.2 and Fig.3)

EPRs are the treatment of choice following resection of tumours. These have been used for 39 years in our institution. There has been concern regarding the long term survival of endoprosthesis; this study investigates the fate of the reconstruction. Methods. Between 1966 and 1995, 3716 patients were seen with a suspected neoplasm and 776 patients underwent EPRs. Patients receiving growing endoprostheses were excluded from the study as they invariably require revision, leaving 667 replacements. Insufficient data was available in 6 cases, leaving 661 patients in the study group. Information was reviewed concerning the diagnosis, survival of implant and patient, subsequent surgery, complications and functional outcome. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used for implant survival with end points defined as revision for mechanical failure (aseptic loosening, implant fracture, instability, avascular necrosis, periprosthetic fracture, pain and stiffness) and revision for any cause (infection, local recurrence and mechanical failure). Results. Mean age at diagnosis was 34 years. Overall patient survival was 52.7% at 10 years and 45.7% at 20 years. The mean follow-up for all patients was 9 years, and for those patients who survived their original disease, the mean follow-up was 15 years. 227 (34%) patients underwent revision surgery, 75 patients for infection (33%), 36 patients for locally recurrent disease (16%) and mechanical failure in 116 patients (51%). With revision for mechanical failure as the end-point, implant survival was 75% at 10 years and 52% at 20 years. With revision any cause as an end-point implant survival was 58% at 10 years and 38% at 20 years. Overall limb salvage was maintained in 91% of patients at 10 years from reconstruction and 79% at 20 years. There was a significant difference between survival of implant between implantation sites, with the proximal humeral implant survival being the best and tibial reconstructions being the worst. The MTSS functional score was available on 151 patients, with a mean score of 25/30 (83%) at last follow-up visit. Discussion. Our results are comparable with other series of long term follow-up and justifies their continued use

Introduction: In case of massive bone defect, femoral stem revision may cause significant problems to the orthopaedic surgeons. The periprosthetic infection introduces a further element of complication which often leads to complex surgical strategies. The aim of this study was to assess the preliminary results of femoral revision with modular resection femoral stems in a selected group of patients with infected total hip arthroplasty and extensive bone defect. Materials and Methods: The study group included five patients (three women – two men) with an average age of 72 years (range 62–81 years). From 2006 to 2008 the patients underwent a prosthetic femoral revision with resection modular stems to treat a septic loosened primary hip prosthesis (one case) or revision hip prosthesis (four cases). The bacteria responsible for the infection were MRSE in three cases, MSSE and Str. Agalactie in one case, Proteus Mirabilis in one case. Three patients were treated in election for septic loosening of hip implant and two were admitted in our Department as emergency for a periproshtetic femoral fracture (Duncan type B3). In all the patients the femoral bone defect was grade III-B according to Paprosky classification of femoral bone deficiency. One patient with periproshtetic femoral fracture underwent a one-stage prosthetic revision and four patients sustained a two-stage prosthetic revision. In one patient a local flap was performed and Vaacum Assisted Therapy was applied in order to treat an associated loss of substance. The patients underwent periodical clinical controls in which the result has been evaluated by means of Merle-d’Aubigné hip score. Results: The follow-up period ranged from 10 to 28 months. We observed one case of recurrence of infection in the patient treated with a one-stage revision. At present, we did not observe signs of infection in the remaining four patients who underwent a two-stage revision. As for functional result, four patients walked with supports and one without them. No patient referred moderate or severe residual pain. Discussion: The preservation of bone stock is one of the most important goals in prosthetic revision procedures. In some circumstances the amount of femoral bone loss can be so wide to prevent the application of conventional or modular uncemented femoral stems. In these selected cases cemented modular resection femoral stems may represent the only available option for femoral reconstruction. In our clinical experience this solution offered altogether successful outcomes. In our opinion two-stage revision is the preferable surgical choice

Methodology: A retrospective review based on a prospective database was performed on 146 consecutive revision TKA’s. An independent observer measured clinical outcomes using the Knee Society Knee (KS) and Function Score (FS). X-ray evaluation, including rating of radiolucent lines, tibiofemoral and patellofemoral alignment, was carried out by an independent radiologist. ANOVA was used for statistical analysis, with significance set at p≤0.05 (SPSS version 15.0). Post-hoc Bonferroni testing was carried out for single variables including primary cause of failure, age at revision surgery, time span between index operation and revision, type of index operation, partial or total revision and the performance of a tuberosity osteotomy. Results: 146 files were available in 135 patients. 16 patients deceased (17 knees) during the follow-up period and 2 patients (2 knees) were lost to follow-up. 117 patients (127 knees) were available for evaluation. Age at revision surgery averaged 67.7 years (range 32.3–88.1). Mean follow-up time was 4.5 years (range 1–14). Patients had revision TKA between 51 days and 16.1 years (average 4.7 years) after the index TKA. 54% of the early revisions were due to infection and instability, 55% of late revisions were caused by polyethylene-wear and loosening. The mean postoperative KS was 70.8 with a mean improvement of 43.2 points as compared to pre-operative. The mean postoperative FS was 52.9 with a mean improvement of 25.4 points. Grouping outcomes according to cause of failure of the index TKA gave the following ranking from better to worse, without being significant: wear (n=15; KS 80.8; range 43–99, SD 17.5), loosening (n=44; KS 75.8; range 15–100, SD=21.2), malalignment (n=19; KS 70.0; range 9–95, SD 25.9), instability (n=33; KS 68.2; range 5–100, SD 24.1), others (n=16; KS 66.7; range 10–100, SD 25.9), and infection (n=21; KS 64.2; range 3–100, SD 31.7). Survivorship at 5 years was 90.0% (CI 86.4% –93.6%), at 10 years 84,6% (CI 77.0% –92.3%) and at 14 years 84,6% (CI 37.7% –131.6%). Significant better outcomes were seen with late revisions, index operation being partial knee replacement and older age at revision. More failures (p=0.002) were seen with early revisions. In 32.6% of the patients radiolucent lines of ≥1 mm were observed. Points were granted with the use of a Radiolucency Scoring Scheme. Patients with less than 4 points (n=87, mean KS 71.2) had better outcomes than patients with 4 or more points (n=8, mean KS 56.4). 87% of patients were aligned within 4° of mechanical axis. Conclusion:. Outcomes of revision TKA are inferior to primary TKA. Early failures were mainly caused by infection, instability, malalignment. Grouping revision TKA’s to etiology of failure did not lead to significant differences in outcomes. Significant better outcomes were reported for late revisions, patients with older age at revision surgery and partial knee replacement. Survivorship analysis was significally better for late than for early revisions