Deep infection is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship between surgeon volume and the incidence of revision for infection after primary TKA. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from 1 September 1999 to 31 December 2020 for primary TKA for osteoarthritis that were revised for infection. Surgeon volume was defined by the number of primary TKA procedures performed by the surgeon in the year the primary TKA was performed and grouped as <25, 25-49, 50-74, 75-99, >100 primary TKA procedures per year. Kaplan Meir estimates for cumulative percent revision (CPR) and Cox Proportional Hazard Ratios were performed to compare rates of revision for infection by surgeon volume, with sub-analyses for patella and polyethylene use, age <65 years and male gender. 5295 of 602,919 primary TKA for osteoarthritis were revised for infection. High volume surgeons (>100 TKA/year) had a significantly lower rate of revision for infection with a CPR at 1 and 17 years of 0.4% (95% CI 0.3, 0.4) and 1.5% (95% CI 1.2, 2.0), respectively, compared with 0.6% (95% CI 0.5, 0.7) and 2.1% (95% CI 1.8, 2.3), respectively, for low volume surgeons (<25 TKR/year). Differences between the high-volume group and the remaining groups remained when sub-analysis for age, gender, ASA, BMI, patella resurfacing and the use of cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE). High volume surgeons have lower rates of revision for infection in primary TKA

Hospital and surgeon volume is inversely associated with perioperative mortality, dislocation and infection rates following total hip replacement (THR). This study evaluated the relationship between hospital/surgeon volume on early failures requiring revision in a sample of 6826 Medicare beneficiaries in 1995–1996. The primary outcome for the analysis was the time between the primary THR and the first revision. After adjustment for sociodemographic/clinical variables, patients of low volume surgeons in centers with a caseload less than one hundred THR/year were twice as likely to be revised compared with patients in high volume centers by high volume surgeons. The purpose of this study was to determine whether hospital/surgeon volume is associated with early failures requiring revision. Patients of low volume surgeons have considerably higher rates of early failure, especially within the first year following surgery. This study highlights the importance of including surgeon volume among factors that influence referrals for elective THR. We analyzed claims data of 6826 Medicare beneficiaries, who underwent elective primary THR in 1995–1996 in OH, PA and CO. Hospitals were stratified into, low (< 12 THR/year), medium (12–100 THR/year) and high (> 100 THR/year) volume groups. Low volume surgeons performed fewer than twelve primary THR/ yr. Associations between rates of revisions/surgeon volume were determined by risk ratios after adjusting for hospital volume, patient age, poverty status, gender and comorbidities. We examined whether the effect of surgeon volume on revision rates differed across yearly time intervals. Of patients who had primary THR in 1995–96, two hundred and seventy-one (4%) had at least one revision by the end of 1999, one hundred and twenty-six (46%) of those occurring within the first year after the surgery. Cumulative rates of revision ranged from 2.3% for primary THR in high volume centers performed by high volume surgeons to 5.9% for patients who had primary THR performed by low volume surgeons in low volume centers. Further analysis revealed that the effect of surgeon volume was striking in the first year after the surgery (RR: 2.34; 95%CI: 1.47– 3.78) and was not evident in the subsequent years (RR: 1.08; 95%CI: 0.73–1.58)

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Strategy regarding patella resurfacing in total knee replacement (TKR) remains controversial. TKR revision rates are reportedly influenced by surgeon procedure volume. The study aim was to compare revision outcomes of TKR with and without patella resurfacing in different surgeon volume groups using data from the AOANJRR. The study population included 571,149 primary TKRs for osteoarthritis. Surgeons were classified as low, medium, or high-volume based on the quartiles of mean primary TKR volume between 2011 and 2020. Cumulative percent revision (CPR) using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship were calculated for the three surgeon volume groups with and without patella resurfacing. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age and sex, were used to compare revision risks. High-volume surgeons who did not resurface the patella had the highest all-cause CPR (20-year CPR 10.9%, 95% CI [10.0%, 12.0%]). When the patella was resurfaced, high-volume surgeons had the lowest revision rate (7.3%, 95% CI [6.4%, 8.4%]). When the high-volume groups were compared there was a higher rate of revision for the non-resurfaced group after 6 months. When the medium-volume surgeon groups were compared, not resurfacing the patella also was associated with a higher rate of revision after 3 months. The low-volume comparisons showed an initial higher rate of revision with patella resurfacing, but there was no difference after 3 months. When only patella revisions were considered, there were higher rates of revision in all three volume groups where the patella was not resurfaced. TKR performed by high and medium-volume surgeons without patella resurfacing had higher revision rates compared to when the patella was resurfaced. Resurfacing the patella in the primary procedure protected against revision for patella reasons in all surgeon volume groups. Level of evidence: III (National registry analysis)

Introduction: The recent UK national comparative audit of the use of blood in primary, elective, unilateral THR found that 25% of patients required a peri-operative transfusion. We felt this figure was higher than should be expected, especially of surgeons with a dedicated arthroplasty subspecialty. We therefore audited our own practice with particular emphasis on the relationship between surgeon volume, implant and the need for transfusion. Methods: A retrospective review of 508 consecutive primary, elective, unilateral hip and knee arthroplasties performed over a 12 month period. Pre- and post- operative haemoglobin levels, need for transfusion, and the timing and volume of any transfusion were recorded for each patient. Analysis determined the overall rate of transfusion, the details of any such transfusion, and the effects of surgeon volume upon the transfusion rate. Results: The transfusion rate following THR (10%) was significantly lower than those found in the national audit. The transfusion rate following TKR was 7%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that surgeon volume (< 50 THRs/yr Vs > 50 THRs/yr) and a preop-erative Hb < 12g/dl were the only significant determinants of a need for post operative transfusion (Both p< 0.05) following both THR and TKR. Other variables (age, gender, anaesthetic type, ASA, indication, surgeon grade and experience, implant, approach) were not significant. A preoperative haemoglobin of < 12g/dl was associated with a 6 fold and 3 fold increased risk of needing a transfusion following hip and knee replacement respectively. Discussion: The need for allogenic blood transfusion following primary arthroplasty is influenced by both patient and surgeon related factors. Surgeons who have a dedicated arthroplasty practice and perform a high volume of procedures have significantly lower transfusion rates when compared to nationally accepted figures. This has implications for both patient care and resource management

We compared the rate of revision of two classes of primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty, stemmed (aTSA) and stemless (sTSA) undertaken with cemented all polyethylene glenoid components. A large national arthroplasty registry identified two cohort groups for comparison, aTSA and sTSA between 1. st. January 2011 and 31. st. December 2020. A sub-analysis from 1 January 2017 captured additional patient demographics. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age and gender. Of the 7,533 aTSA procedures, the CPR at 8 years was 5.3% and for 2,567 sTSA procedures was 4.0%. There was no difference in the risk of revision between study groups (p=0.128). There was an increased risk of revision for aTSA and sTSA undertaken with humeral head sizes <44mm (p=0.006 and p=0.002 respectively). Low mean surgeon volume (MSV) (<10 cases per annum) was a revision risk for aTSA (p=0.033) but not sTSA (p=0.926). For primary diagnosis osteoarthritis since 2017, low MSV was associated with an increased revision risk for aTSA vs sTSA in the first year (p=0.048). Conversely, low MSV was associated with a decreased revision risk for sTSA in the first 6 months (p<0.001). Predominantly aTSA was revised for loosening (28.8%) and sTSA for instability/dislocation (40.6%). Revision risk of aTSA and sTSA was associated with humeral head size and mean surgeon volume but not patient characteristics. Inexperienced shoulder arthroplasty surgeons experience lower early revision rates with sTSA in the setting of osteoarthritis. Revision of aTSA and sTSA occurred for differing reasons

Aims. The aim of this study is to evaluate the change in incidence rate of shoulder arthroplasty, indications, and surgeon volume trends associated with these procedures between January 2003 and April 2021 in the province of Nova Scotia, Canada. Methods. A total of 1,545 patients between 2005 and 2021 were analyzed. Patients operated on between 2003 and 2004 were excluded due to a lack of electronic records. Overall, 84.1% of the surgeries (n = 1,299) were performed by two fellowship-trained upper limb surgeons, with the remainder performed by one of the 14 orthopaedic surgeons working in the province. Results. Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) was the most frequent procedure (32.17%; n = 497), followed by stemmed hemiarthroplasty (SHA) (27.7%; n = 428). The most frequent indication for primary shoulder arthroplasty was degenerative osteoarthritis (58.1%; n = 882), followed by acute proximal humerus fracture in 15.11% (n = 245), and rotator cuff arthropathy in 14.18% (n = 220). The overall rate of revision was 7.7% (2.8% to 11.2%). The number of TSAs and reverse shoulder arthroplasties (RSAs) has been increasing since 2016. The amount of revision cases is proportional to the number of operations performed in the same year throughout the study period. Conclusion. The incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the Maritime Provinces has increased over the last 16 years. Revision rates are similar the those found in other large database registries. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty prevalence has increased since 2016. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):567–572

The aim of this study was to measure the effect of hospital case volume on the survival of revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA). This is a retrospective analysis of Scottish Arthroplasty Project data, a nationwide audit which prospectively collects data on all arthroplasty procedures performed in Scotland. The primary outcome was RTHA survival at ten years. The primary explanatory variable was the effect of hospital case volume per year on RTHA survival. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine the lifespan of RTHA. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards were used to estimate relative revision risks over time. Hazard ratios (HRs) were reported with 95% CI, and p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. From 1999 to 2019, 13,020 patients underwent RTHA surgery in Scotland (median age at RTHA 70 years (interquartile range (IQR) 62 to 77)). In all, 5,721 (43.9%) were female, and 1065 (8.2%) were treated for infection. 714 (5.5%) underwent a second revision procedure. Co-morbidity, younger age at index revision, and positive infection status were associated with need for re-revision (p<0.001). The ten-year survival estimate for RTHA was 93.3% (95% CI 92.8 to 93.8). Adjusting for sex, age, surgeon volume, and indication for revision, high hospital case volume was not significantly associated with lower risk of re-revision (HR1, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.00, p 0.073)). The majority of RTHA in Scotland survive up to ten years. Increasing yearly hospital case volume cases is not independently associated with a significant risk reduction of re-revision

Patients with a high comorbidity burden (high-risk) can achieve similar improvements in quality of life compared to low-risk patients, but greater morbidity may deter surgeons from operating on these patients. Whether surgeon volume influences THA outcomes in high-risk patients has not been investigated. This study aimed to compare complication rates and implant survivorship in high-risk patients operated on by high volume (HV) and non-HV THA surgeons. Patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5 and American Society of Anesthesiologist Classification of 3 or 4 undergoing primary, elective THA between 2013 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were separated into groups based on whether they were operated on by a HV surgeon (defined as the top 25% of surgeons at our institution by number of primary THAs per year) or a non-HV surgeon. Groups were propensity matched 1:1 to control for demographic variables. A total of 1,134 patients were included in the matched analysis. Ninety day readmissions and revisions were compared between groups, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate implant survivorship within the follow-up period. Years of experience were comparable between Non-HV and HV surgeons (p=0.733). The HV group had significantly shorter surgical times (p<0.001), and shorter length of stay (p=0.009) compared to the Non-HV group. The HV group also had significantly fewer 90-day readmissions (p=0.030), all-cause revisions (p=0.023) and septic revisions (p=0.020) compared to the non-HV group at latest follow-up. The HV group had significantly greater freedom from all-cause (p=0.023) and septic revision (p=0.020) compared to the non-HV group. High-risk THA patients have fewer 90-day readmissions, all-cause revisions, septic revisions, as well as shorter length of stay when treated by HV surgeons. THA candidates with a high comorbidity burden may benefit from referral to high-volume surgeons to reduce procedural risk and improve postoperative outcomes

The 22 year survivorship of metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (RSA) is reported to be 94.3% with expert surgeons, in males with head sizes greater than 48mm. The 2023 National Joint Registry (NJR) report estimates survivorship of all RSA at 19 years to be 85%. This estimate includes all designs, head sizes and females. Our aim was to estimate the survivorship of RSA currently available for implantation (males only, head size >48mm, MatOrtho Adept or Smith and Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)) in those under 55 years, performed by all surgeons, compared to conventional THR. We performed a retrospective analysis of the NJR. We included all males under 55 years who had undergone BHR or Adept RSA with head size greater than 48mm. Propensity score matching was used to produce two comparable groups of patients for RSA or conventional THR. We matched in a 3:1 ratio (THR:RSA) using sex, ASA, BMI group, age at primary procedure, surgeon volume, diagnosis and surgeon grade as covariates. The primary analysis was survivorship at 18 years. Time-to-revision was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox's proportional hazard models were used to investigate between group differences. 4839 RSA were available for analysis. After matching the RSA and THR groups were well balanced in terms of covariates. Survivorship at 18 years was 93.7% (95% CI 89.9,96.2) in the RSA group and 93.9% (90.5,96.0) in the THR group. Despite these similar estimates the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.40 (95% CI 1.18, 1.67 p<0.001) in favour of THR. Survivorship of the currently available RSA in males under 55 was 93.7% at 18 years, however THR survivorship was superior to RSA. These results, generalisable to UK practice, should be set against perceived benefits in functional status offered in RSA when counselling patients

Background. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with concomitant meniscal injury occurs frequently. Meniscal repair is associated with improved long-term outcomes compared to resection but is also associated with a higher reoperation rate. Knowledge of the risk factors for repair failure may be important in optimizing patient outcomes. Purpose. This study aimed to identify the patient and surgical risk factors for meniscal repair failure, defined as a subsequent meniscectomy, following concurrent primary ACL reconstruction. Methods. Data recorded by the New Zealand ACL Registry and the Accident Compensation Corporation, the New Zealand Government's sole funder of ACL reconstructions and any subsequent surgery, was reviewed. Meniscal repairs performed with concurrent primary ACL reconstruction was included. Root repairs were excluded. Univariate and multivariate survival analysis was performed to identify the patient and surgical risk factors for meniscal repair failure. Results. Between 2014 and 2020, a total of 3,024 meniscal repairs were performed during concurrent primary ACL reconstruction (medial repair = 1,814 and lateral repair = 1,210). The overall failure rate was 6.6% (n = 201) at a mean follow-up of 2.9 years, with a failure occurring in 7.8% of medial meniscal repairs (142 out of 1,814) and 4.9% of lateral meniscal repairs (59 out of 1,210). The risk of medial failure was higher in patients with a hamstring tendon autograft (adjusted HR = 2.20, p = 0.001), patients aged 21–30 years (adjusted HR = 1.60, p = 0.037) and in those with cartilage injury in the medial compartment (adjusted HR = 1.75, p = 0.002). The risk of lateral failure was higher in patients aged ≤ 20 years (adjusted HR = 2.79, p = 0.021) and when the procedure was performed by a surgeon with an annual ACL reconstruction case volume of less than 30 (adjusted HR = 1.84, p = 0.026). Conclusion. When performing meniscal repair during a primary ACL reconstruction, the use of a hamstring tendon autograft, younger age and the presence of concomitant cartilage injury in the medial compartment increases the risk of medial meniscal repair failure, whereas younger age and low surgeon volume increases the risk of lateral meniscal repair failure

The primary objective is to compare revision rates for lumbar disc replacement (LDR) and fusion at the same or adjacent levels in Ontario, Canada. The secondary objectives include acute complications during hospitalization and in 30 days, and length of hospital stay. A population-based cohort study was conducted using health administrative databases including patients undergoing LDR or single level fusion between October 2005 to March 2018. Patients receiving LDR or fusion were identified using physician claims recorded in the Ontario Health Insurance Program database. Additional details of surgical procedure were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information hospital discharge abstract. Primary outcome measured was presence of revision surgery in the lumbar spine defined as operation greater than 30 days from index procedure. Secondary outcomes were immediate/ acute complications within the first 30 days of index operation. A total of 42,024 patients were included. Mean follow up in the LDR and fusion groups were 2943 and 2301 days, respectively. The rates of revision surgery at the same or adjacent levels were 4.7% in the LDR group and 11.1% in the fusion group (P=.003). Multivariate analysis identified risk factors for revision surgery as being female, hypertension, and lower surgeon volume. More patients in the fusion group had dural tears (p<.001), while the LDR group had more “other” complications (p=.037). The LDR group had a longer mean hospital stay (p=.018). In this study population, the LDR group had lower rates of revision compared to the fusion group. Caution is needed in concluding its significance due to lack of clinical variables and possible differences in indications between LDR and posterior decompression and fusion

The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, annual trend, perioperative outcomes, and identify risk factors of early-onset (≤ 90 days) deep surgical site infection (SSI) following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for osteoarthritis. Risk factors for early-onset deep SSI were assessed. We performed a retrospective population-based cohort study using prospectively collected patient-level data from several provincial administrative data repositories between January 2013, and March 2020. The diagnosis of early-onset deep SSI was based on published Centre for Disease Control/National Healthcare Safety Network (CDC/NHSN) definitions. The Mann-Kendall Trend Test was used to detect monotonic trends in early-onset deep SSI rates over time. The effects of various patient and surgical risk factors for early-onset deep SSI were analyzed using multiple logistic regression. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality and 90-day readmission. A total of 20,580 patients underwent primary TKA for osteoarthritis. Forty patients had a confirmed deep SSI within 90-days of surgery representing a cumulative incidence of 0.19%. The annual infection rate did not change over the 7-year study period (p = 0.879). Risk factors associated with early-onset deep SSI included blood transfusions (OR, 3.93 [95% CI 1.34-9.20]; p=0.004), drug or alcohol abuse (OR, 4.91 [95% CI 1.85-10.93]; p<0.001), and surgeon volume less than 30 TKA per year (OR, 4.45 [1.07-12.43]; p=0.013). Early-onset deep SSI was not associated with 90-days mortality (OR, 11.68 [0.09-90-58]; p=0.217), but was associated with an increased chance of 90-day readmission (OR, 50.78 [26.47-102.02]; p<0.001). This study establishes a reliable baseline infection rate for early-onset deep SSI after TKA for osteoarthritis through the use of a robust methodological process. Several risk factors for early-onset deep SSI are potentially modifiable or can be optimized prior to surgery and be effective in reducing the incidence of early-onset SSI. This could guide the formulation of provincial screening programs and identify patients at high risk for SSI

Background. Improving quality and efficiency is a priority in health policy. Several studies have shown a correlation between high hospital volume and improved results of surgery. In Norway, orthopaedic surgeons operate a relatively low number of total knee replacements compared with other countries. The number of total knee replacements has, however, increased significantly over the past 10 years. Some studies have also shown an association between surgeon volume and outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Purpose. We wanted to study a possible correlation between prosthesis survival and surgery volume of TKA, both with respect to hospital volume and surgeon volume. Materials and Methods. To examine the annual surgery volume per hospital we used registry data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) for cemented TKA without patella component from 1994–2009. A questionnaire regarding surgeon volume in 2000 and 2009 was sent to all 58 operating hospitals in Norway, as this is not registered in the NAR. We received responses from 29 hospitals. Surgeon volume was defined by the percentage of surgeons at the hospital who operated 1–10 TKA over a year. Cox regression (without adjustment) was used to estimate proportions without revision and relative differences (RR). Analyses were also done for a subset of commonly used prostheses (AGC, LCS, LCS Complete, Duracon, NexGen, Profix), and for the prosthesis LCS and Profix separately. Results. Median annual hospital volume increased from 19 knees in 1995 to 83 in 2009. Prosthesis survival at 10 years was 92.5% (95% CI: 91.6–93.4) with 1–24 operations annually and 95.3% (93.7–96.8) with 100–149 operations. We found a lower risk of revision for hospitals with 25–49 (RR = 0.86, p = 0.06), 50–99 (RR = 0.81, p = 0.01, 100–149 (RR = 0.59, p<0.001 and 150 or more (RR = 0.48, p <.001) operations per year, compared to the hospitals with 1–24 operations. The analyses for subgroups of prosthesis brands provided similar results, except for the Profix prosthesis where there was no difference between hospital volumes. In 2000, 47% of the Norwegian hospitals had two thirds of the surgeons operating 1–10 TKA annually, but this was reduced to 24% in 2009. High annual surgeon volume gave the best results in our analyses. Conclusion. There has been an increase in the number of TKAs over time, in Norway as in other countries. Surgeon volume has also increased over time. Previously a high number of surgeons performed a low number of total knee arthroplasties, but this has been significantly reduced over the last 10 years. Survival curves from the NAR show a gradual improvement over time regarding the results of TKA. Our study indicated better results for TKA both at higher hospital volume and surgeon volume. Further analyses should investigate whether other factors may have an influence on this result

Revision is a key negative outcome of joint replacements. The purpose of this abstract is to present revision risk curves for hip and knee replacements based on the most recently available national data sources. Having a better understanding of determinants of revision risk can help inform clinical and health care system improvements. We explored revision risk of primary joint replacement stratified by key clinical, prosthesis, and surgeon-level factors using data from three databases managed by CIHI: the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry (CJRR), the Discharge Abstract Database, and the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System. To investigate early revisions, we used Kaplan-Meier analysis stratified by demographic factors to determine the risk of revision within up to five years of primary surgery. This analysis identified the primary cohort from the CJRR from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2017 and was limited to mandatory reporting provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario) to ensure maximal coverage of prosthesis information. Bearing surface was obtained from the International Prosthesis Library maintained by the International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries (ICOR) and the International Society of Arthroplasty Registers (ISAR). The total revision risk cohort contained 283,620 primary surgeries, of which 5,765 (2%) had at least one revision. For total hip arthroplasties, revision risk at the end of the follow-up period did not differ by age, by sex or across bearing surface (metal on cross-linked polyethylene [XLPE], ceramic on XLPE, ceramic on ceramic, metal on non-cross-linked polyethylene). For hemiarthroplasties in hip fracture patients, cement fixation was significantly associated with decreased revision risk. Surgeon volume had a positive effect on survivorship with cementless fixation (2.7% at one year [95% CI 2.3%, 3.1%] for high-volume vs 3.2% [2.7%, 3.7%] for low-volume). However, surgeon volume did not have an effect on survivorship with cemented fixation (2% at one year [95% CI 1.3%, 2.6%] for high-volume vs. 2% [1.4%, 2.6%] for low-volume). For total knee replacements, revision risk increased with decreasing age and male sex. For patients aged 75 and older, four-year revision risks were 1.5% (95% CI 1.3%, 1.7%) for women and 2.0% (1.7%, 2.3%) for men, but for patients under 55 years old, they were 4.3% (3.7%, 5%) for women and 5.9% (4.9%, 6.9%) for men. Additional results from the upcoming 2019 CJRR annual report, including data up to March 31, 2018, will be presented. Revisions represent a key failure of the primary replacement, they are costly to the health care system and negatively affect patients' quality of life. CJRR's coverage is currently 72%, increased coverage and follow-up time will allow increasingly comprehensive reporting on hip and knee prostheses in Canada. Future work in this area involves exploring additional prosthesis attributes for stratification of revision risk curves and calculation of hazards ratios adjusted by age and sex

Introduction. Previous studies have demonstrated that higher volume hospitals have better outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), in current literature there are no reports investigating the effect of surgeon volume. The purpose of this study is to investigate if patients of high-volume revision surgeons have better outcomes following rTKA as compared to patients of low volume surgeons. Methods. This retrospective observational analysis examined the rTKA database at a large urban academic medical center for aseptic, unilateral rTKA between January 2016 and March 2019 with at least 1-year of follow-up. Surgeon operative volume during the same time period was evaluated. Surgeons who performed at least 18 aseptic rTKA per year were considered high volume (HV), whereas surgeons who performed fewer than 18 aseptic rTKA per year were considered low volume (LV). Demographics, surgical factors, and post-operative outcomes were collected and compared between the two cohorts. A post-hoc power analysis was conducted for full revisions (1-ß=0.909, α=0.05). Results. 307 cases were identified: 177 performed by LV surgeons and 130 performed by HV surgeons. The only demographic difference was a greater proportion of non-smokers in the LV cohort (59.4% vs. 50.0%; p=0.031). Patients of HV surgeons were more likely to receive a full revision (64.6% vs. 47.5%; p<0.001). For all revisions, HV surgeons had shorter surgical times by about 17 minutes (p=0.010). For the 168 full revisions (84 HV, 84 LV), patients of HV surgeons had shorter hospital stays (2.92±1.62 vs. 3.57±2.69 days; p=0.048), shorter surgical times (131.42±33.86 vs. 171.65±49.88 minutes; p<0.001), lower re-revision rates (7.1% vs. 19.0%; p=0.038), and fewer re-revisions (0.07±0.26 vs. 0.29±0.74 re-revisions; p=0.018). Conclusions. Patients of HV revision surgeons have better outcomes following full rTKA. These findings support the development of revision teams within arthroplasty centers of excellence to offer patients the best possible outcomes following rTKA

Meniscal repairs are commonly performed during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for meniscal repair failure following concurrent primary ACL reconstruction. Primary ACL reconstructions with a concurrent repair of a meniscal tear recorded in the New Zealand ACL Registry between April 2014 and December 2018 were analyzed. Meniscal repair failure was defined as a patient who underwent subsequent meniscectomy, and was identified after cross-referencing data from the ACL Registry with the national database of the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC). Multivariate Cox regression was performed to produce hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to identify the patient and surgical risk factors for meniscal repair failure. 2041 meniscal repairs were analyzed (medial = 1235 and lateral = 806). The overall failure rate was 9.4% (n = 192). Failure occurred in 11.1% of medial (137/1235) and 6.8% of lateral (55/806) meniscal repairs. The risk of medial failure was higher with hamstring tendon autografts (adjusted HR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.23 – 3.26, p = 0.006) and in patients with cartilage injury in the medial compartment (adjusted HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.09 – 2.23, p = 0.015). The risk of lateral failure was higher when the procedure was performed by a surgeon with an annual case volume of less than 30 ACL reconstructions (adjusted HR = 1.92, 95% CI 1.10 – 3.33, p = 0.021). Age, gender, time from injury-to-surgery and femoral tunnel drilling technique did not influence the risk of meniscal repair failure. When repairing a meniscal tear during ACL reconstruction, the use of a hamstring tendon autograft or the presence of cartilage injury in the medial compartment increases the risk of medial meniscal repair failure. Lower surgeon case volume increases the risk of lateral meniscal repair failure

The aim of this study was to measure the effect of hospital case-volume on the survival of revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). A retrospective analysis of Scottish Arthroplasty Project data was performed. The primary outcome was RTKA survival at ten years. The primary explanatory variable was annual hospital case-volume. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to determine the lifespan of RTKA. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards were used to estimate relative revision risks over time. From 1998 to 2019, 8894 patients underwent RTKA surgery in Scotland (median age 70 years, median follow-up 6.2 years, 4789 (53.5%) females; 718 (8.8%) for infection). Of these patients, 957 (10.8%) underwent a second revision procedure on their knee. Male sex, younger age at index revision, and positive infection status were associated with need for re-revision. The ten-year survival estimate for RTKA was 87.3% (95%CI 86.5–88.1). Adjusting for gender, age, surgeon volume and infection status, increasing hospital case-volume was significantly associated with lower risk of re-revision (Hazard Ratio 0.78 (0.64–0.94, p<0.001)). The risk of re-revision steadily declined in centres performing >20 cases per year: relative risk reduction 16% with >20 cases; 22% with >30 cases; and 28% with >40 cases. The majority of RTKA in Scotland survive up to ten years. Increasing yearly hospital case-volume above 20 cases is independently associated with a significant risk reduction of re-revision. Development of high-volume tertiary centres may lead to an improvement in the overall survival of RTKA