Increased collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) in registries enables international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after knee and hip replacement. We aimed to investigate 1) variations in PROM improvement, 2) the possible confounding factor of BMI, and 3) differences in comorbidity distributions between registries. Registries affiliated with the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) or OECD membership countries were invited to report aggregate EQ-5D, OKS, OHS, HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS values. Eligible patients underwent primary total, unilateral knee or hip replacement for osteoarthritis within three years and had completed PROMs preoperatively and either 6 or 12 months postoperatively, excluding patients with subsequent revisions. For each PROM cohort, Chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (male/female, age 20-64/65-74/>75, high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were reported for available comorbidity indexes. Thirteen registries from 9 countries contributed data, n~130000 knee (range 140 to 79848) and n~113000 hip (range 137 to 85281). Mean EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.53 to 0.71 (knee) and 0.50 to 0.70 (hips) preoperatively and 0.78 to 0.85 (knee) and 0.83 to 0.87 (hip) postoperatively. Mean OKS (6 registries) ranged from 19.3 to 23.6 preoperatively and 36.2 to 41.2 postoperatively. Mean OHS (7 registries) ranged from 18.0 to 23.2 preoperatively and 39.8 to 44.2 postoperatively. Four registries reported KOOS-PS and three reported HOOS-PS. Proportions of patients with BMI >30 ranged from 35 to 62% (10 knee registries) and 16 to 43% (11 hip registries). For both knee and hip registries, distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed significantly among registries (p30 were for patients in the youngest age groups (20 to 64 and 65 to 74 years) with the lowest baseline scores. Additionally, females with lowest preoperative PROM scores had highest BMI. These findings were echoed for the OHS and OKS cohorts. Proportions of patients with ASA scores ≥3 ranged from 7 to 42% (9 knee registries) and 6 to 35% (8 hip registries). PROM-score improvement varies between international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, sex and preoperative scores. BMI and comorbidity may be relevant to adjust for.
This study uses prospective registry data to compare early patient outcomes following arthroscopic repair or debridement of the acetabular labrum. Data on adult patients who underwent arthroscopic labral debridement or repair between 1 January 2012 and 31 July 2019 were extracted from the UK Non-Arthroplasty Hip Registry. Patients who underwent microfracture, osteophyte excision, or a concurrent extra-articular procedure were excluded. The EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D) and International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12) questionnaires were collected preoperatively and at six and 12 months post-operatively. Due to concerns over differential questionnaire non-response between the two groups, a combination of random sampling, propensity score matching, and pooled multivariable linear regression models were employed to compare iHOT-12 improvement.Aims
Methods
Custom flanged acetabular components (CFAC) have been shown to be effective in treating complex acetabular reconstructions in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the specific patient factors and CFAC design characteristics that affect the overall survivorship remain unclear. Once the surgeon opts to follow this treatment pathway, numerous decisions need to be made during the pre-operative design phase and during implantation, which may influence the ultimate success of CFAC. The goal of this study was to retrospectively review the entire cohort of CFAC cases performed at a large volume institution and to identify any patient, surgeon, or design factors that may be related to the long-term survival of these prostheses. We reviewed 96 CFAC cases performed in 91 patients between 2004 and 2017, from which 36 variables were collected spanning patient demographics, pre-operative clinical and radiographic features, intraoperative information, and implant design characteristics. Patient demographics and relevant clinical features were collected from individual medical records. Radiographic review included analysis of pre-operative radiographs, computer tomographic (CT) scans, and serial post-operative radiographs. Radiographic failure was defined as loosening or gross migration as determined by a board-certified orthopedic surgeon. CFAC implant design characteristics and intra-operative features were collected from the design record, surgical record and post-operative radiograph for each case respectively. Two sets of statistical analyses were performed with this dataset. First, univariate analyses were performed for each variable, comprising of a Pearson chi-square test for categorical variables and an independent t-test for continuous variables. Second, a random forest supervised machine learning method was applied to identify the most influential variables within the dataset, which were then used to perform a bivariable logistic regression to generate odds ratios. Statistical significance for this study was set at p < 0.05.Introduction
Methods
Acetabular component position is considered a major factor affecting the etiology of hip dislocation. The ‘Lewinnek safe zone’ has been the most widely accepted range for component position to avoid hip dislocation, but recent studies suggest that this safe zone is outdated. We used a large prospective institutional registry to ask: 1) is there a ‘safe zone’ for acetabular component position, as measured on an anteroposterior radiograph, within which the risk of hip dislocation is low?, and 2) do other patient and implant factors affect the risk of hip dislocation? From 2007 to 2012, 19,449 patients (22,097 hip procedures) were recorded in an IRB approved prospective total joint replacement registry. All patients who underwent primary THA were prospectively enrolled, of which 9,107 patients consented to participate in the registry. An adverse event survey (80% compliance) was used to identify patients who reported a dislocation event in the six months after hip replacement surgery. Postoperative AP radiographs of hips that dislocated were matched with AP radiographs of stable hips, and acetabular position was measured using Ein Bild Röntgen Analyse software. Dislocators in radiographic zones (± 5°, ± 10°, ± 15° boundaries) were counted for every 1° of anteversion and inclination angles.Introduction
Materials and Methods
The aim of this study was to quantify mid-flexion laxity in a total knee arthroplasty with an elevated joint line, as compared to a native knee and a TKA with joint line maintained. Our hypothesis was joint line elevation of 4mm would increase coronal plane laxity throughout mid-flexion in a pattern distinct from the preoperative knee or in a TKA with native joint line. Six fresh-frozen cadaver legs from hip-to-toe underwent TKA with a posterior stabilised implant (APEX PS, OMNIlife Science, Inc.) using a computer navigation system equipped with a robotic cutting-guide, in this controlled laboratory cadaveric study. After the initial tibial and femoral resections were performed, the flexion and extension gaps were balanced using navigation, and a 4mm recut was made in the distal femur. The remaining femoral cuts were made, the femoral component was downsized by resecting an additional 4mm of bone off the posterior condyles, and the polyethylene was increased by 4mm to create a situation of a well-balanced knee with an elevated joint line. The navigation system was used to measure overall coronal plane laxity by measuring the mechanical alignment angle at maximum extension, 30, 45, 60 and 90(of flexion, when applying a standardised varus/valgus load of 9.8Nm across the knee using a 4kg spring-load located at 25cm distal to the knee joint line. Laxity was also measured in the native knee, as well as the native knee after a standard approach during TKA which included a medial release. Coronal plane laxity was defined as the absolute difference (in degrees) between the mean mechanical alignment angle obtained from applying a standardised varus and valgus stress at 0, 30, 45, 60 and 90(.Introduction
Methods
The aims of this study were: 1) to quantitatively analyse the amount of knee extension that is achieved with +2mm incremental increases in the amount of distal femoral bone that is resected during TKA in the setting of a flexion contracture, 2) to quantify the amount of coronal plane laxity that occurs with each 2mm increase in the amount of distal femur resected. In the setting of a soft tissue flexion contracture, we hypothesized that although resecting more distal femur will reliably improve maximal knee extension, it will ultimately lead to increased varus and/or valgus laxity throughout mid-flexion. Seven fresh-frozen cadaver legs from hip-to-toe underwent TKA with a posterior stabilized implant using a measured resection technique with computer navigation system equipped with a robotic cutting-guide, in this IRB approved, controlled laboratory study. After the initial tibial and femoral resections were performed, the posterior joint capsule was sutured (imbricated) through the joint space under direct visualization until a 10° flexion contracture was obtained with the trial components in place, as confirmed by computer navigation. Two distal femoral recuts of +2mm each where then subsequently made and after the remaining femoral cuts were made, the trail implants were reinserted. The navigation system was used to measure overall coronal plane laxity by measuring the mechanical alignment angle at maximum extension, 30°, 60° and 90° of flexion, when applying a standardized varus/valgus load of 9.8 [Nm] across the knee using a 4kg spring-load located at 25cm distal to the knee joint line.(Figure 1) Coronal plane laxity was defined as the absolute difference (in °) between the mean mechanical alignment angle obtained from applying a standardized varus and valgus stress at 0°, 30, 60° and 90°. Each measurement was performed three separate times and averaged. The maximal extension angle achieved following each 2mm distal recut was also recorded. Two-tailed student's t-tests were performed to analyze whether there was difference in the mean laxity at each angle and if there was a significant improvement in maximal extension with each recut. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant.Aims/Hypothesis
Methods
Our aim was to compare the passive kinematics and coronal plane stability throughout flexion in the native and the replaced knee, using three different TKA designs: posterior stabilized (PS), bi-cruciate substituting (BCS), and ultracongruent (UC). Our hypotheses were: 1.) a guided motion knee replacement (BCS) offers the closest replication of native knee kinematics in terms of femoral rollback 2.) the replaced knee will be significantly more stable in the coronal plane than the native knee; 3.) No difference exists in coronal plane stability between the 3 implants/designs throughout flexion. After IRB approval, two cadaveric specimens were used for a pilot study to determine sample size. Five fresh-frozen hip-to-toe cadaveric specimens then underwent TKA using an anatomic measured resection technique with a computer-navigated robotic femoral cutting-guide. The PS, BCS, and UC TKA designs were implanted in each knee using the same distal and posterior femoral cuts to standardize the position of the implants. Computer navigation was then utilized to record the varus/valgus laxity of each implant at 0°, 30°, 60° and 90° of flexion while applying a standardized 9.8Nm moment. Passive tibiofemoral kinematics were measured in a continuous passive motion machine from 10° to 110°. Femoral rollback on the tibia was calculated for the native and replaced knees by measuring the closest point (CP) on the femoral condyle to a transverse plane perpendicular to the mechanical axis of the tibia at each flexion angle.Purpose
Methods
