Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 10 of 10
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_3 | Pages 69 - 69
23 Feb 2023
Morgan S Wall C de Steiger R Graves S Page R Lorimer M
Full Access

The aim of this study was to examine the incidence of obesity in patients undergoing primary total shoulder replacement (TSR) (stemmed and reverse) for osteoarthritis (OA) in Australia compared to the incidence of obesity in the general population.

A 2017–18 cohort of 2,621 patients from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) who underwent TSR, were compared with matched controls from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) National Health Survey from the same period. The two groups were analysed according to BMI category, sex and age.

According to the 2017–18 National Health Survey, 35.6% of Australian adults are overweight and 31.3% are obese. Of the primary TSR cases performed, 34.2% were overweight and 28.6% were obese. The relative risk of requiring TSR for OA increased with increasing BMI category. Class-3 obese females, aged 55–64, were 8.9 times more likely to require TSR compared to normal weight counterparts. Males in the same age and BMI category were 2.5 times more likely. Class-3 obese patients underwent TSR 4 years (female) and 7 years (male) sooner than their normal weight counterparts.

Our findings suggest that the obese population is at risk for early and more frequent TSR for OA. Previous studies demonstrate that obese patients undergoing TSR also exhibit increased risks of longer operative times, higher superficial infection rates, higher periprosthetic fracture rates, significantly reduced post-operative forward flexion range and greater revision rates.

Obesity significantly increases the risk of requiring TSR. To our knowledge this is the first study to publish data pertaining to age and BMI stratification of TSR Societal efforts are vital to diminish the prevalence and burden of obesity related TSR.

There may well be reversible pathophysiology in the obese population to address prior to surgery (adipokines, leptin, NMDA receptor upregulation). Surgery occurs due to recalcitrant or increased pain despite non-op Mx.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 24 - 24
10 Feb 2023
Truong A Wall C Stoney J Graves S Lorimer M de Steiger R
Full Access

Obesity is a known risk factor for hip osteoarthritis. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of obesity in Australians undergoing hip replacements (HR) for osteoarthritis to the general population. A cohort study was conducted comparing data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from 2017-18. Body mass index (BMI) data for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement and resurfacing for osteoarthritis were obtained from the AOANJRR. The distribution of HR patients by BMI category was compared to the general population, in age and sex sub-groups. During the study period, 32,495 primary HR were performed for osteoarthritis in Australia. Compared to the general population, there was a higher incidence of Class I, II, and III obesity in patients undergoing HR in both sexes aged 35 to 74 years old. Class III obese females and males undergoing HR were on average 6 to 7 years younger than their normal weight counterparts. Class III obese females and males aged 55-64 years old were 2.9 and 1.7 times more likely to undergo HR, respectively (p<0.001). There is a strong association between increased BMI and relative risk of undergoing HR. Similar findings have been noted in the United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, Sweden and Spain. A New Zealand Registry study and recent meta-analysis have also found a concerning trend of Class III obese patients undergoing HR at a younger age. Obese Australians are at increased risk of undergoing HR at a younger age. A national approach to address the prevalence of obesity is needed


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)


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_15 | Pages 109 - 109
1 Aug 2017
Walter W
Full Access

Background. Since the development of modern total hip replacement (THR) more than 50 years ago, thousands of devices have been developed in attempt to improve patient outcomes and prolong implant survival. Modern THR devices are often broadly classified according to their method of fixation; cemented, uncemented or hybrid (typically an uncemented acetabular component with a cemented stem). Due to early failures of THR in young active patients, the concept of hip resurfacing was revisited in the 1990's and numerous prostheses were developed to serve this patient cohort, some with excellent clinical results. Experience with metal-on-metal (MoM) bearing related issues particularly involving the ASR (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, Indiana) precipitated a fall in the use of hip resurfacing (HR) prostheses in Australia from a peak of 30.2% in 2004 to 4.3% in 2015. The effects of poorly performing prostheses and what is now recognised as suboptimal patient selection are reflected in the AOANJRR cumulative percent revision (CPR) data which demonstrates 13.2% revision at 15 years for all resurfacing hip replacements combined; with 11 different types of hip resurfacing prostheses recorded for patients less than 55 years of age and a primary diagnosis of OA. When this data is restricted to only those prostheses currently used in Australia (BHR; Smith and Nephew, Birmingham, UK & ADEPT; MatOrtho Ltd, Surrey, UK) there is a CPR of 9.5% at 15 years for all patients. Despite these CPR results, recognition is emerging of the important distinction between MoM THR and resurfacing. Furthermore, in light of current consensus for patient selection and the surgical indications for resurfacing, a gender analysis demonstrates a CPR for females of 14.5% at 10 years compared to 3.7% for males. Similar difference for head size >50mm with 6% CPR at 10 years compared to 17.6% for head size <50mm (HR=2.15; 1.76, 2.63; p<0.001). Leading to renewed interest in resurfacing particularly in the young, active male. In addition to registry based CPR data, several studies have concluded that a true difference in mortality rates between HR and other forms of THR exists independent of age, sex or other confounding factors. We hypothesised that a difference in adjusted mortality rates between HR and other forms of THR may also be present in the Australian population. We undertook an ad hoc data report request to the AOANJRR. The data set provided was deidentified for patient, surgeon and institution and included all HR and conventional THR procedures performed for the diagnosis of primary osteoarthritis recorded in the Registry since inception in 1999. We requested mortality and yearly cumulative percent survival (CPS) of patients for primary HR and THR with sub-group analysis by the mode of fixation. There were 12,910 hip resurfacings (79% male) compared to 234,484 conventional THR (46.8% male) over the study period. When adjusted for age and gender over the 15 years of available data, there was a statistically significant difference in cumulative percent survival (CPS) between conventional THR and hip resurfacing (HR 1.66 (1.52, 1.82; p<0.001)) and between cemented THR and hip resurfacing (HR 1.96 (1.78, 2.43; p<0.001)); between uncemented THR and hip resurfacing (HR 1.58 (1.45, 1.73; p<0.001)); and between hybrid THR and hip resurfacing (HR 1.82 (1.66, 1.99; p<0.001)). When adjusted for age, gender and ASA over the 3 years data available, there was no statistically significant difference in CPS between hip resurfacing and any individual fixation type of THR. Discussion. The results demonstrate a statistically significant adjusted survival advantage for hip resurfacing compared to conventional THR and between fixation methods for THR. These findings are consistent with previous studies. While a difference in adjusted mortality rate appears to exist, we are yet to definitively determine the complex interplay of causative factors that may contribute to it


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 96 - 96
1 Feb 2020
Harris A Christen B Malcorps J O'Grady C Sensiba P Vandenneucker H Huang B Cates H Hur J Marra D Kopjar B
Full Access

Introduction. Patients ≤ 55 years have a high primary TKA revision rate compared to patients >55 years. Guided motion knee devices are commonly used in younger patients yet outcomes remain unknown. Materials and Methods. In this sub-group analysis of a large multicenter study, 254 TKAs with a second-generation guided motion knee implant (Journey II Bi-Cruciate Stabilized Knee System, Smith & Nephew, Inc., Memphis) were performed between 2011–2017 in 202 patients ≤ 55 years at seven US and three European sites. Revision rates were compared with Australian Joint Registry (AOANJRR) 2017 data. Results. Average age 49.7 (range 18–54); 56.4% females; average BMI 34 kg/m. 2. ; 67.1% obese; patellae resurfaced in 98.4%. Average follow-up 4.2 years; longest follow-up six years; 27.5% followed-up for ≥ five years. Of eight revisions: total revision (one), tibial plate replacements (three), tibial insert exchanges (four). One tibial plate revision re-revised to total revision. Revision indications were mechanical loosening (n=2), infection (n=3), peri-prosthetic fracture (n=1), and instability (n=2). The Kaplan-Meier revision estimate was 3.4% (95% C.I. 1.7% to 6.7%) at five years compared to AOANJRR rate of 6.9%. There was no differential risk by sex. Discussion. Reasons for high TKA revision rates in younger patients remain unknown. Conclusion. The revision rate of the second-generation guided motion knee system is lower in younger patients compared to registry controls


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 83 - 83
1 Feb 2020
Shimmin A Pierrepont J Bare J McMahon S
Full Access

Introduction & aims. Apparently well-orientated total hip replacements (THR) can still fail due to functional component malalignment. Previously defined “safe zones” are not appropriate for all patients as they do not consider an individual's spinopelvic mobility. The Optimized Positioning System, OPS. TM. (Corin, UK), comprises preoperative planning based on a patient-specific dynamic analysis, and patient-specific instrumentation for delivery of the target component alignment. The aim of this study was to determine the early revision rate from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) for THRs implanted using OPS. TM. . Method. Between January 4. th. 2016 and December 20. st. 2017, a consecutive series of 841 OPS. TM. cementless total hip replacements were implanted using a Trinity acetabular cup (Corin, UK) with either a TriFit TS stem (98%) or a non-collared MetaFix stem (2%). 502 (59%) procedures were performed through a posterior approach, and 355 (41%) using the direct superior approach. Mean age was 64 (range; 27 to 92) and 51% were female. At a mean follow-up of 15 months (range; 3 to 27), the complete list of 857 patients was sent to the AOANJRR for analysis. Results. There were 5 revisions: . a periprosthetic femoral fracture at 1-month post-op in a 70F. a ceramic head fracture at 12-months post-op in a 59M. a femoral stem loosening at 7-months post-op in a 58M. a femoral stem loosening at 16-months post-op in a 64M. an anterior dislocation in a 53M, that was revised 9 days after the primary procedure. CT analysis, prior to revision surgery, revealed acetabular cup orientation of 46°/31° (inclination/anteversion) and femoral stem anteversion of 38°. Conclusions. These preliminary findings suggest the OPS. TM. dynamic planning and delivery system provides good early results, with a low rate of revision for dislocation. Limitations of the study will be discussed


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 5 - 5
1 Apr 2019
Wilson C Sires J Lennon S Inglis M
Full Access

Introduction. Despite improvement in implants and surgical techniques up to 20% of Total Knee Arthroplasty TKA patients continue to report dissatisfaction. The ATTUNE Knee System was designed to provide better patellar tracking and stability through the mid-range of flexion and therefore improve patient outcomes and satisfaction. Aims. The aims of this study were to assess patient outcomes in a consecutive series of ATTUNE TKA and ensure early results were comparable to other TKA systems in Australia. Methods. Between September 2014 and December 2015, 332 ATTUNE TKR's were implanted locally. All patients in our learning curve from case 1 were included. Mean follow-up was 2.6 years (range: 2.0–3.2). Revision, complications and postoperative ROM was collected. Patient reported outcome was measured using the Multi-Attribute Arthritis Prioritization Tool (MAPT) questionnaire. Revision rates were cross checked with an AOANJRR Ad Hoc report. Results. Revision rate of the ATTUNE TKR was lower than national rates, however not statistically different (1.6% vs. 2.1%) (p=0.508). Postoperative MAPT scores were significantly lower after TKR (median 63.4 vs. 0.0) (p<0.001). A total of 86.7% patients had a good outcome postoperative TKR (MAPT≤ 20). Conclusion. Our findings suggest the ATTUNE TKR has comparable revision rates to other TKRs currently available in Australia. Furthermore, patient reported outcome was high 2.8 years postoperatively, with 85% patient satisfaction


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_22 | Pages 3 - 3
1 Dec 2016
Dunbar M
Full Access

Over the past 15 years metal on metal hip resurfacing (MOMHR) has seen a spectacular resurgence in utilization followed by near abandonment of the procedure. A select group of surgeons still offer the procedure to a select group of patients suggesting that there are benefits of MOMHR over total hip arthroplasty (THA). This is problematic for the following reasons:. 1). MOMHR does not lead to increased survivorship. The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) and the England and Wales National Joint Registry, from countries with high rates of utilization of MOMHR, both report significantly worse survivorship with MOMHR compared to all types of conventional THA. Risk factors for revision of resurfacing were older patients, females, smaller femoral head size, patients with developmental dysplasia, and certain implant designs. 2). MOMHR is associated with the generation of metal ions that can have devastating effects in some patients. Cobalt and chromium ions generated from MOMHR can result in adverse local tissues reactions around the hip, sometimes with catastrophic consequences, as well as neurological deficits, skin rashes, and cardiomyopathy. It is unclear as to which patients are at risk for the generation of high ion levels and less clear with respect to the host response to these ions. The discriminative and predictive values of ion testing are still being determined. MOMHR subsequently require careful follow-up with limited tools to assess risk and pending problems. 3). MOMHR is not less invasive. In order to deliver the femoral head for safe preparation and to access the acetabulum with the femoral head and neck in situ, significant dissection and retraction are required. The exposure issue is compounded as the procedure is most often performed in younger, larger males. Difficulty with exposure has been associated with an insult to the femoral head's blood supply that may lead to fracture and/or neck narrowing. 4). Preservation of the femoral canal with MOMHR does not improve outcomes of revision. The perceived advantage of preserved femoral head and neck implies that a conversion of a MOMHR to total hip should convey survivorship similar to primary THA. However, this is not the case as confirmed by data from the AOANJRR demonstrating worse survivorship of revised resurfacings when compared to a primary total hip arthroplasty. 5). MOMHR does not result in superior functional outcomes. Advocates for MOMHR often claim that the large femoral head and intact femoral neck in resurfacing results in a better functional outcome and therefore, a better quality of life and satisfaction when compared to a conventional THA. This, however, was not the case when gait speed, postural balance evaluations and functional tests were used in a randomised study of 48 patients, which failed to show an advantage of MOMHR over THA. In conclusion, it is relatively straightforward to oppose and argue against the use of hip resurfacings as they have worse outcomes in all National Joint Registries, produce metal ions with significant clinical consequences, are more invasive, are difficult to revise with subsequent inferior outcomes when compared to a conventional primary THA, and do not provide better function. These adverse features come with a premium price when compared to a conventional THA


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 158 - 158
1 May 2016
Graves S Lorimer M Bragdon C Muratoglu O Malchau H
Full Access

Introduction. Infection remains a serious complication following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Many factors including primary diagnosis, comorbidities and duration of procedure are known to influence the rate of infection. Although the association between patient and surgical factors is increasingly well understood, little is known about the role of the prosthesis. This analysis from the Australian Registry (AOANJRR) was undertaken to determine if revision for infection varied depending on the type of bearing surface used. Methods. Three different bearing surfaces, ceramic on ceramic (CoC), ceramic on cross-linked polyethylene (CoXP) and metal on cross-linked polyethylene (MoXP) were compared. The study population included all primary THA undertaken for OA using these bearing surfaces and reported to the AOANJRR between 1999 and 2013. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were compiled with revision for infection as the end point. Hazard Ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare revision rates. Sub analysis examining the effect of age, gender, fixation of the femoral stem and femoral head size. To ensure there was no confounding due to differences in femoral and acetabular component selection a further analysis was undertaken which compared the three different bearings with the same stem and acetabular component combinations. Results. During the study period there were 177,237 primary THA's reported to the registry that met the inclusion criteria (57,839 CoC, 24,269 CoXP and 95129 MoXP). When all procedures were included Both MoXP and CoXP had a higher revision rate for infection compared to CoC (HR 1.46 (1.25, 1.72) p<0.001 and HR 1.42 (1.15, 1.75) p=0.001 respectively). There was no difference in the revision rate for infection when MoXP and CoXP were compared. There was an age variation with the lower revision rate for infection rate being evident in patient's age 70 years or younger but not older patients. Both men and women had a lower revision rate when CoC was used. The difference was evident when a cementless femoral stem was used but not when the stem was cemented. The difference was also evident for most head sizes with the exception of 28 mm heads. CoC also had a lower revision rate for infection when the same femoral stem and acetabular component combinations were compared. Conclusion. Patients aged 70 years or less have a lower revision rate for infection when a CoC bearing is used compared to both CoXP and MoXP. This difference was independent of gender, and femoral and acetabular prostheses selection. No difference was evident if the femoral component was cemented or a head size of 28 mm was used


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_3 | Pages 92 - 92
1 Jan 2016
Noble P Noel C
Full Access

INTRODUCTION. The timely identification of outliers (implants, surgeons or patients) using prospectively collected registry data is confounded by many factors, including the assumption that the sampled population is representative of the entire cohort of patients. In this study we utilized a computer simulation of a joint registry to address the question: How does incomplete enrollment of patients in registries affect the reliability of identification of outliers, and what percent capture of the target population is sufficient?. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A synthetic registry was created consisting of 10,000 patients (100 surgeons), of whom, 1000 underwent joint replacement using a new implant. A predictive model for the risk of revision was created from data published by the Swedish TKR Registry and the AOANJRR. The pairing of patients, surgeons and implants was randomized and for each assignment, the probability of revision was computed. We then chose random samples of all patients in 10% increments from 10% to 100%, simulating incomplete capture of all potential cases by the registry. For each sample we calculated the number of cases of the new implant predicted to end in revision. The assignments were repeated 2000 times using implants with revision rates of 1.5%, 2.0% and 3.0% per annum vs. 1.0% for all other implants of the same class. RESULTS. The observed failure rate of the new implant averaged 2.0%, but varied from 0.7–3.8% over the 2000 trials, with 100% enrollment. With only 10% enrollment, the spread of failure rates increased to 0.0–7.8%, corresponding to a 152% increase in the variability of the observed revision rate. When enrollment was increased from 80% to 100%, the variability of the failure rate changed by only 9% from a range of 1.63% (1.23–2.86%) to 1.50% (1.30–2.80%) (90% CI). The reliability of detection of poorly performing implants improved dramatically with enrollment. With 70% enrollment, an implant with a 2.0% failure rate could be detected with 95% confidence, while a 3.0% implant became apparent with only 21% enrollment. Conversely, with even 100% enrollment it was not possible to identify implants with a 1.5% annual failure rate with 95% confidence. CONCLUSIONS. If registries collect a truly representative sample of only 50–80% of the total patient population, there will be only a slight increase in the risk of overlooking an inferior outlier, including poorly-performing implants, compared to 100% patient capture. Our results suggest that enrollment of every patient receiving a given treatment is not nearly as important as randomization of the sample subjected to analysis