Aims

Cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has advantages over cemented UKA, including improved fixation, but has a higher risk of tibial plateau fracture, particularly in Japanese patients. The aim of this multicentre study was to determine when cementless tibial components could safely be used in Japanese patients based on the size and shape of the tibia.

Aims. The mean age of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has reduced with time. Younger patients have increased expectations following TKA. Aseptic loosening of the tibial component is the most common cause of failure of TKA in the UK. Interest in cementless TKA has re-emerged due to its encouraging results in the younger patient population. We review a large series of tantalum trabecular metal cementless implants in patients who are at the highest risk of revision surgery. Methods. A total of 454 consecutive patients who underwent cementless TKA between August 2004 and December 2021 were reviewed. The mean follow-up was ten years. Plain radiographs were analyzed for radiolucent lines. Patients who underwent revision TKA were recorded, and the cause for revision was determined. Data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Island, the Isle of Man and the States of Guernsey (NJR) were compared with our series. Results. No patients in our series had evidence of radiolucent lines on their latest radiological assessment. Only eight patients out of 454 required revision arthroplasty, and none of these revisions were indicated for aseptic loosening of the tibial baseplate. When compared to data from the NJR annual report, Kaplan-Meier estimates from our series (2.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 5.87)) show a significant reduction in cumulative estimates of revision compared to all cemented (4.82 (95% CI 4.69 to 4.96)) or cementless TKA (5.65 (95% CI 5.23 to 6.10)). Our data (2.94 (95% CI 1.24 to 5.87)) also show lower cumulative revision rates compared to the most popular implant (PFC Sigma Cemented Knee implant fixation, 4.03 (95% CI 3.75 to 4.33)). The prosthesis time revision rate (PTIR) estimates for our series (2.07 (95% CI 0.95 to 3.83)) were lower than those of cemented cases (4.53 (95% CI 4.49 to 4.57)) from NJR. Conclusion. The NexGen trabecular (tantalum) cementless implant has lower revision rates in our series compared to all cemented implants and other types of cementless implants, and its use in younger patients should be encouraged. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):277–285

Cementless knee arthroplasty has seen a recent resurgence in popularity due to conceptual advantages, including improved osseointegration providing biological fixation, increased surgical efficiency, and reduced systemic complications associated with cement impaction and wear from cement debris. Increasingly younger and higher demand patients are requiring knee arthroplasty, and as such, there is optimism cementless fixation may improve implant survivorship and functional outcomes. Compared to cemented implants, the National Joint Registry (NJR) currently reports higher revision rates in cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but lower in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, recent studies are beginning to show excellent outcomes with cementless implants, particularly with UKA which has shown superior performance to cemented varieties. Cementless TKA has yet to show long-term benefit, and currently performs equivalently to cemented in short- to medium-term cohort studies. However, with novel concepts including 3D-printed coatings, robotic-assisted surgery, radiostereometric analysis, and kinematic or functional knee alignment principles, it is hoped they may help improve the outcomes of cementless TKA in the long-term. In addition, though cementless implant costs remain higher due to novel implant coatings, it is speculated cost-effectiveness can be achieved through greater surgical efficiency and potential reduction in revision costs. There is paucity of level one data on long-term outcomes between fixation methods and the cost-effectiveness of modern cementless knee arthroplasty. This review explores recent literature on cementless knee arthroplasty, with regards to clinical outcomes, implant survivorship, complications, and cost-effectiveness; providing a concise update to assist clinicians on implant choice. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(1):48–57

Aims. The primary objective of this registry-based study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during the first postoperative year. The secondary objective was to assess one- and three-year implant survival of both fixation techniques. Methods. We analyzed 10,862 cementless and 7,917 cemented UKA cases enrolled in the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry, operated between 2017 and 2021. Pre- to postoperative change in outcomes at six and 12 months’ follow-up were compared using mixed model analyses. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were applied to quantify differences in implant survival. Adjustments were made for patient-specific variables and annual hospital volume. Results. Change from baseline in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and activity-related pain was comparable between groups. Adjustment for covariates demonstrated a minimally greater decrease in rest-related pain in the cemented group (β = -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to -0.01)). Cementless fixation was associated with a higher probability of achieving an excellent OKS outcome (> 41 points) (adjusted odds ratio 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). The likelihood of one-year implant survival was greater for cemented implants (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.71)), with higher revision rates for periprosthetic fractures of cementless implants. During two to three years’ follow-up, the likelihood of implant survival was non-significantly greater for cementless UKA (adjusted HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.04)), primarily due to increased revision rates for tibial loosening of cemented implants. Conclusion. Cementless and cemented medial UKA led to comparable improvement in physical function and pain reduction during the initial postoperative year, albeit with a greater likelihood of achieving excellent OKS outcomes after cementless UKA. Anticipated differences in early physical function and pain should not be a decisive factor in the choice of fixation technique. However, surgeons should consider the differences in short- and long-term implant survival when deciding which implant to use. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(5):401–410

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the actual cost of a cemented and cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure. Materials and Methods. The cost of operative time, implants, cement, and cementing accessories were included in the overall cost of the TKA procedure. Operative time was determined from a previously published study comparing cemented and cementless implants of the same design. The cost of operative time, implants, cement, and cementing accessories was determined from market and institutional data. Results. Mean operative time for cemented TKA was 11.6 minutes longer for cemented TKA than cementless TKA (93.7 minutes (. sd. 16.7) vs 82.1 minutes (. sd. 16.6); p = 0.001). Using a conservative published standard of $36 per minute for operating theatre time cost, the total time cost was $418 higher for cementing TKA. The cost of cement and accessories ranged from $170 to $625. Overall, the calculated cost of cemented TKA is $588 to $1043, depending on technique. The general increased charge for cementless TKA implants over cemented TKA implants was $366. Conclusion. The overall procedural cost of implanting a cementless TKA is less than implanting a cemented TKA. Cost alone should not be a barrier to using cementless TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(7 Supple C):61–63

Aims. The aim of this study was to report patient and clinical outcomes following robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) at multiple institutions with a minimum two-year follow-up. Methods. This was a multicentre registry study from October 2016 to June 2021 that included 861 primary RA-TKA patients who completed at least one pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) questionnaire, including Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR), and pain out of 100 points. The mean age was 67 years (35 to 86), 452 were male (53%), mean BMI was 31.5 kg/m. 2. (19 to 58), and 553 (64%) cemented and 308 (36%) cementless implants. Results. There were significant improvements in PROMs over time between preoperative, one- to two-year, and > two-year follow-up, with a mean FJS of 17.5 (SD 18.2), 70.2 (SD 27.8), and 76.7 (SD 25.8; p < 0.001); mean KOOS JR of 51.6 (SD 11.5), 85.1 (SD 13.8), and 87.9 (SD 13.0; p < 0.001); and mean pain scores of 65.7 (SD 20.4), 13.0 (SD 19.1), and 11.3 (SD 19.9; p < 0.001), respectively. There were eight superficial infections (0.9%) and four revisions (0.5%). Conclusion. RA-TKA demonstrated consistent clinical results across multiple institutions with excellent PROMs that continued to improve over time. With the ability to achieve target alignment in the coronal, axial, and sagittal planes and provide intraoperative real-time data to obtain balanced gaps, RA-TKA demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes and PROMs in this patient population. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):589–595

Aims. Although bone cement is the primary mode of fixation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), cementless fixation is gaining interest as it has the potential of achieving lasting biological fixation. By 3D printing an implant, highly porous structures can be manufactured, promoting osseointegration into the implant to prevent aseptic loosening. This study compares the migration of cementless, 3D-printed TKA to cemented TKA of a similar design up to two years of follow-up using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) known for its ability to predict aseptic loosening. Methods. A total of 72 patients were randomized to either cementless 3D-printed or a cemented cruciate retaining TKA. RSA and clinical scores were evaluated at baseline and postoperatively at three, 12, and 24 months. A mixed model was used to analyze the repeated measurements. Results. The mean maximum total point motion (MTPM) at three, 12, and 24 months was 0.33 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.42), 0.42 mm (95% CI 0.33 to 0.51), and 0.47 mm (95% CI 0.38 to 0.57) respectively in the cemented group, versus 0.52 mm (95% CI 0.43 to 0.63), 0.62 mm (95% CI 0.52 to 0.73), and 0.64 mm (95% CI 0.53 to 0.75) in the cementless group (p = 0.003). However, using three months as baseline, no difference in mean migration between groups was found (p = 0.497). Three implants in the cemented group showed a > 0.2 mm increase in MTPM between one and two years of follow-up. In the cementless group, one implant was revised due to pain and progressive migration, and one patient had a liner-exchange due to a deep infection. Conclusion. The cementless TKA migrated more than the cemented TKA in the first two-year period. This difference was mainly due to a higher initial migration of the cementless TKA in the first three postoperative months after which stabilization was observed in all but one malaligned and early revised TKA. Whether the biological fixation of the cementless implants will result in an increased long-term survivorship requires a longer follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1016–1024

Introduction. Cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains the gold standard with survivorship above 90% at greater than 10 years postoperatively. However, with younger, heavier, more active patients undergoing TKA at an increasing rate, cementless implants have the appeal of potential for improved implant fixation longevity and decreased rates of aseptic loosening. The cementless implants are more expensive than their cemented counterparts such that implant costs may create a barrier to utilization. However, such comparisons fail to consider the unavoidable additional costs of cementing, including the cost of operating room time, cement and cementing accessories. The purpose of this study is to compare the actual cost of cemented and cementless TKA. Methods. The TKA cost calculation included the cost of operative time, implants, cement and cementing accessories. The difference in operative time between cemented and cementless TKA was determined from a previously published study of 100 TKAs performed using a cemented (55) or press fit (45) implant of the same design performed at a single institution by four fellowship trained arthroplasty surgeons. The decision to use cemented or cementless design in these patients was made based on patient bone quality intraoperatively. Operative time was compared between groups using a Student's two-tailed T-test. The cost of operating room time was based on estimates in the recent literature. The cost of cement and cementing accessories was estimated based on publically available market data. The cost of implants was estimated from institutional data for multiple companies. Results. The cost comparison between cemented and cementless total knee arthroplasty is summarized in Table 1. Mean operative time for cemented TKA was 14.3 minutes longer than for cementless TKA (94.7 + 15.2 vs. 80.4 + 15.7, p<0.01). The estimated cost of one minute of operating room time in the literature ranges from $30 to $60. For our analysis, we used an estimate of $36 per minute obtained from a recently published multi-center study. This resulted in an average operating room time cost $3406 for cemented and $2894 for cementless TKA. Antibiotic cement costs an average of $250 per bag and antibiotic-free cement costs an average of $75 per bag. Cement mixing techniques vary across surgeons. Approximately 95% use a vacuum system and 5% use a mixing bowl. The cost of vacuum systems ranges from $80 for an enclosed bowl to $125 for a vacuum system that can be directly connected to a cement gun. The cost of a plastic mixing bowl and spatula is $20. The cost of the disposables from a cement injection kit is $25. The average cost of a primary TKA implant, including femoral, tibial and polyethylene liner components, is $3530 for cemented and $4659 for cementless designs. Patellar resurfacing is not routinely used at our institution and therefore was not included in implant cost. Based on our calculations, the average cost of a cementless TKA is $7553. Using the cheapest cementing technique with 2 bags of plain cement and a manual mixing bowl with spatula, the cost of a cemented TKA $7114. Using the most expensive cementing technique with 2 bags of antibiotic cement and a cement gun compatible vacuum mixer, the cost of a cemented TKA is $7564. Conclusion. Cemented TKA remains the gold standard and still accounts for most procedures. Cementless TKA is increasing in utilization and may decrease the rate of aseptic loosening, especially in the rapidly growing young, active population undergoing TKA. Although cementless implants remain more expensive than cemented implants at most institutions, the actual overall cost of the two procedures is similar if operative time, cement and cementing accessories are considered. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

We randomised 62 knees to receive either cemented or cementless versions of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement. The implants used in both arms of the study were similar, except that the cementless components were coated with porous titanium and hydroxyapatite. The tibial interfaces were studied with fluoroscopically-aligned radiographs. At one year there was no difference in clinical outcome between the two groups. Narrow radiolucent lines were seen at the bone-implant interfaces in 75% of cemented tibial components. These were partial in 43%, and complete in 32%. In the cementless implants, partial radiolucencies were seen in 7% and complete radiolucencies in none. These differences are statistically significant (p < 0.0001) and imply satisfactory bone ingrowth into the cementless implants

Abstract. Introduction. After remodelling, loss of bone density beside the keel of cementless UKR tibial components has been observed as a potential cause of concern. How this affects patient-reported outcomes, and further clinical implications, is unclear. This study aims to assess the effect of cementless UKR implantation on tibial bone density, and to explore its relationship to patient demographics and outcomes. Method. This prospective study assesses 115 anterior-posterior radiographs from cementless UKR postoperatively and five years after surgery. Grey values from nine regions around each keel were collected and standardised to enable inter-radiograph comparison. Change between the post-operative and 5-year radiographs (indicating bone density) was calculated, and effect on 5-year patient demographics and pain and functional outcomes was assessed. Repeat measurements were performed by two operators to assess reliability. Results. There was excellent inter-operator correlation. There was increased bone density directly below the keel (9.1% vs 3.3%: p<0.0001), and reduced density beside the keel (−5.9% vs -1.0%, p<0.0001); comparisons to adjacent regions. Overall remodelling was significantly greater in smaller tibias (p=0.006), and females (p=0.01). Remodelling was unrelated to outcomes (OKS, ICOAP-A/B, TAS), age, and BMI. Conclusion. Remodelling patterns suggest increased loading below and decreased loading adjacent to the tibial keel. Remodelling is greater in smaller tibias and females. Remodelling is not related to any patient-reported pain or function five years after surgery, suggesting that remodelling is successful in removing any mechanical source of bone pain. Therefore, clinicians viewing such remodelling patterns can ignore them as they are of no consequence

Background. In recent years, the use of modern cementless implants in total knee arthroplasty has been increasing in popularity. These implants take advantage of new technologies such as additive manufacturing and potentially provide a promising alternative to cemented implant designs. The purpose of this study was to compare implant migration and tibiofemoral contact kinematics of a cementless primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implanted using either a gap balancing (GB) or measured resection (MR) surgical technique. Methods. Thirty-nine patients undergoing unilateral TKA were recruited and assigned based on surgeon referral to an arthroplasty surgeon who utilizes either a GB (n = 19) or a MR (n = 20) surgical technique. All patients received an identical fixed-bearing, cruciate-retaining beaded peri-apatite coated cementless femoral component and a pegged highly porous cementless tibial baseplate with a condylar stabilizing tibial insert. Patients underwent a baseline radiostereometric analysis (RSA) exam at two weeks post-operation, with follow-up visits at six weeks, three months, six months, and one year post-operation. Migration including maximum total point motion (MTPM) of the femoral and tibial components was calculated over time. At the one year visit patients also underwent a kinematic exam using the RSA system. Results. Mean MTPM of the tibial component at one year post-operation was not different (mean difference = 0.09 mm, p = 0.980) between the GB group (0.85 ± 0.37 mm) and the MR group (0.94 ± 0.41 mm). Femoral component MTPM at one year post-operation was also not different (mean difference = 0.27 mm, p = 0.463) between the GB group (0.62 ± 0.34 mm) and the MR group (0.89 ± 0.44 mm). Both groups displayed a lateral pivot pattern with similar frequencies of condylar separation. Conclusion. There was no difference in implant migration and kinematics of a single-radius, cruciate retaining cementless TKA performed using a GB or MR surgical technique. The magnitude of migration suggests there is no risk of early loosening. The results provide support for the use of a cementless TKA as a viable alternative to cemented fixation

Introduction. Bone mineral density (BMD) is correlated with component migration and aseptic loosening after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Older implant designs have demonstrated BMD loss up to 23% in the first 6 months after TKA, and continued to BMD decline at an average of 5% per year for as long as 2 years after TKA. The impact of component design and fixation method on BMD loss after TKA in modern implant designs has not been fully elucidated. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of tibial tray thickness and fixation method (cemented versus cementless) on BMD loss patterns of the proximal tibia in two different modern TKA implant systems. Methods. A prospective, nonrandomized, single center study of patients undergoing primary TKA by one of two surgeons was performed with four study cohorts: cemented DePuy Attune, cementless DePuy Attune, cemented Stryker Triathlon, cementless Stryker Triathlon. Target sample size was 80, with 20 per cohort based on adhoc power analysis. Exclusion criteria included: age over 75, BMI >40, inflammatory arthritis, previous knee surgery involving the femur, tibia or tibial bone, and diagnosis of osteopenia/osteoporosis. Implant fixation type was based on surgeon intraoperative assessment of patient bone quality. Demographic data was collected preoperatively. Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) Bone Density Monitoring was performed at 6 weeks and one year postoperatively. Bone mineral density was calculated from the DEXA scans for 4 zones for the tibia relative to the keel or central peg: anterior, posterior, medial and lateral. Results were reported as BMD at 1 year postoperatively as a percentage of BMD at 6 weeks postoperatively. Results. 81 knees with complete DEXA studies at 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively were available for analysis. The mean (SD) age at the time of surgery was 65.4 years (6.1), with 39 men and 42 women and a mean (SD) BMI of 31.2 kg/m. 2. (4.7). The patients who received cementless implants were significantly younger with a mean (SD) age of 62.1 (6.0) than those who received cemented implants with a mean age of 69.1 (3.7) (p < 0.05). There was no difference in age between implant type (p > 0.05). There was no difference in BMI or gender distribution between implant types or fixation type (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in mean BMD loss between 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively between the cemented and cementless Triathlon in any zone, between the cemented Triathlon and Attune in any zone, the cementless Triathlon and Attune in any zone, and the cemented and cementless attune in the lateral, anterior and posterior proximal tibia (p > 0.05). There was significantly more BMD loss seen in the medial tibia in the cemented (BMD at 1 year 88% of BMD at 6 weeks) than cementless (BMD at 1 year 103% of BMD at 6 weeks) Attune (p = 0.043). Conclusion. BMD loss at 1 year postoperatively versus 6 weeks postoperatively after TKA with two modern implant designs is not significantly affected by tibial tray thickness. BMD loss was unaffected by fixation type for the Stryker Triathlon, but was significant less for the cementless DePuy Attune than the cemented version

Laboratory experiments and computational models were used to predict bone-implant micromotion and bone strains induced by the cemented and cementless Biomet Oxford medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (UKR) tibial implants. Methods. Ten fresh frozen cadaveric knees were implanted with cementless medial mobile UKRs, the tibias were separated and all the soft tissues were resected. Five strain gauge rosettes were attached to each tibia. Four Linear Transducers were used to measure the superior-inferior and transverse bone-implant micromotions. The cementless UKRs were assessed with 10 cycles of 1kN compressive load at 4 different bearing positions. The bone-constructs were re-assessed following cementation of the equivalent UKR. The cemented bone-implant constructs were also assessed for strain and micromotion under 10000 cycles of 10mm anterior-posterior bearing movement at 2Hz and 1kN load. The cadaveric specimens were scanned using Computed Tomography, and 3D computer models were developed using Finite Element method to predict strain and micromotion under various daily loads. Results and Discussion. Results verify computer model predictions and show bone strain pattern differences, with cemented implants distributing the loads more evenly through the bone than cementless implants. Although cementless implants showed micromotions which were greater than computer predictions, the micromotions were as expected significantly greater than those of cemented implants. The computer models reveal that bone strains approach 70% of their failure limit at the posterior and anterior corners adjoining the sagittal and transverse cuts (less pronounced in cemented implants). The base of the keel also develops high strains which can approach failure depending on the amount the implant press-fit. The contributions of the anterior cruciate and patellar tendon forces exacerbate the strains in these regions. This may explain why fractures emanate from the base of the keel and the sagittal cut

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe the pattern of revision indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and any change to this pattern for UKA patients over the last 20 years, and to investigate potential associations to changes in surgical practice over time.

Introduction. Cementless fixation in total knee arthroplasty has been proposed to offer advantages long-term once osteointegration has occurred as there is no substrate between the implant and the bone to fail. Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is a useful tool to study fixation, but typically focused on early migration in the first two post-operative years. Few studies have looked at 10-year RSA migration in cementless fixation and those that have contain small numbers of subjects. The objective of this study was to compare implant migration and inducible displacement between cemented and cementless TKA at 10 years and to compare the 10-year migration to the 2-year data in an effort to validate the predictive modelling of RSA. Methods. Subjects who had previously participated in RSA migration studies with 2-year follow-up were recruited to return for a long-term follow-up exam, at least 10 years from their surgery. The implants under study included two cemented designs from two manufacturers and one porous metal monoblock cementless design. At the 10-year visit, subjects had supine RSA exams to determine long-term migration as well as a loaded exam (single leg stance) to determine inducible displacement. Differences between cemented and cementless groups were evaluated with the Mann Whitney U test and Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were calculated for early and late migrations. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Results. Seventy-five subjects were available for long-term follow-up, with average time since surgery of 12 years. This cohort contained 51 women and 24 men with cemented tibial components in 53 cases (37 female) and cementless tibial components in 22 cases (14 female). At the time of surgery, the subjects were 62±7 years old with BMIs of 33±6 m/kg2 (mean±standard deviation). Median migration at the long-term follow-up was 0.6 mm (MTPM; range 0.2–2.8 mm) and was not different between the cemented and cementless groups (p = 0.9, Mann Whitney U Test). Inducible displacement at 10 years was significantly lower for the cementless implants (p<0.001, Figure 1). Migration at one, two, and 10 years did not correlate with inducible displacement at 10 years. However, migration at one year and two years did correlate with long-term migration, with the strongest correlation at two years (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient for all components = 0.74, p < 0.001, Figure 2). Conclusion. Although long-term migration was not different for cemented or cementless (porous metal monoblock) tibial components, inducible displacement at the 10-year visit was significantly lower for these cementless components, suggesting superior fixation. Additionally, long-term migration was strongly correlated to two-year migration, regardless of fixation. These findings support the predictive value of short-term migration in determining long-term fixation. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Introduction. Poor osseointegration of cementless implants is the leading clinical cause of implant loosening, subsidence, and replacement failure, which require costly and technically challenging revision surgery. The mechanism of osseointegration requires further elucidation. We have recently developed a novel titanium implant for the mouse tibia that maintains in vivo knee joint function and allows us to study osseointegration in an intra-articular, load-bearing environment. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is one of the most important growth factors for regulation of vascular development and angiogenesis. It also plays critical roles in skeletal development and bone repair and regeneration. A specialized subset of vascular endothelium, CD31. hi. EMCN. hi. cells displaying high cell surface expression of CD31 and Endomucin, has been reported to promote osteoblast maturation and may be responsible for bone formation during development and fracture healing. Because of their potential role in osseointegration, the aim of this study was to use our mouse implant model to investigate the role of VEGF and CD31. hi. EMCN. hi. endothelium in osseointegration. Methods. Under an IACUC-approved protocol, the implant was inserted into the right tibia of 16-week-old female C57BL/6 mice (N = 38). The mice were then randomized into 2 groups: Control group (N=19) and Anti-VEGFR group (N=19). A cocktail of VEGFR-1 antibody (25mg/kg) and VEGFR-2 antibody (25mg/kg) was given to the mice in the Anti-VEGFR group by intraperitoneal injection every third day starting immediately after surgery until euthanasia. An equivalent amount of an isotype control antibody was given to the control group. Flow cytometric (N = 4/group) and immunofluorescencent (N = 3/group) analyses were performed at 2 weeks post-implantation to detect the distribution and density of CD31. hi. EMCN. hi. endothelium in the peri-implant bone. Pull-out testing was used at 4 weeks post-implantation to determine the strength of the bone-implant interface. Results. Flow cytometry revealed that Anti-VEGFR treatment decreased CD31. hi. EMCN. hi. vascular endothelium percentage in the peri-implant bone vs. control (p = 0.039) at 2 weeks post-implantation (Fig. 1). This was confirmed by the decrease of CD31 and EMCN double positive cells detected with immunofluorescence at the same time point (Fig. 2). More importantly, anti-VEGFR treatment decreased the maximum load of pullout testing compared with control (p = 0.042) (Fig. 3). Conclusion. VEGF is a key mediator of osseointegration and the development of CD31. hi. EMCN. hi. endothelium. This may provide a new drug target for the enhancement of osseointegration. We have also developed a system to run flow cytometric analysis and perform fluorescent staining on the limited tissue around the implant in this mouse model. This will be a powerful platform for future mechanistic studies on osseointegration. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Introduction. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) offers significant advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but is reported to have higher revision rates in joint registries. In both the New Zealand and the UK national registry the revision rate of cementless UKR is less than cementless. It is not clear whether this is because the cementless is better or because more experienced surgeons, who tend to get better results are using cementless. We aim to use registry data to compare cemented and cementless UKA outcomes, matching for surgical experience and other factors. Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data on 10,836 propensity matched Oxford UKAs (5418 cemented and 5418 cementless) between 2004 and 2015. Logistic regression was utilized to calculate propensity scores to match the cemented and cementless groups for multiple confounders using a one to one ratio. Standardised mean differences were used before and after matching to assess for any covariate imbalances. The outcomes studied were implant survival, reasons for revision and patient survival. The endpoint for implant survival was revision surgery (any component removal or exchange). Cumulative patient and implant survival rates were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients not undergoing revision or death were censored on the study end date. The study endpoints implant and patient survival were compared between cemented and cementless groups using Cox regression models with a robust variance estimator. Results. The 5-year implant survival for cemented and cementless Oxford UKA were 95.4% (95%CI 94.6–96.1%) and 96.5% (95%CI 95.8–97.1%) respectively. Implant revision rates were significantly lower in cementless Oxford UKA than cemented, HR 0.8 (CI 0.64–0.99); (p=0.04). The most common reasons for revision in the cemented Oxford UKA group were aseptic loosening (n=44, 0.8%), pain (n=37, 0.7%) and osteoarthritis progression (n=37, 0.7%) compared with osteoarthritis progression (n=28, 0.5%), pain (n=24, 0.4%), aseptic loosening (n=23,0.4%) in the cementless group. Patient survival 5-year survival rates for cemented and cementless Oxford UKA were 96.1% (95%CI 95.2–96.9) and 96.3% (95%CI 95.4–97.1) respectively and were not significantly different HR 0.91 (95%CI 0.71–1.15); (p = 0.42). Conclusion. This is the first study comparing the outcomes of the cemented and cementless UKA from the largest arthroplasty register in the world. Our work shows the cementless Oxford UKA has superior implant survivorship to the cemented implant at 5 years follow up. Cementless implants also had half the risk of requiring revision for aseptic loosening, which may be related to the decreased incidence of tibial radiolucent lines with cementless fixation. Patient survival did not significantly differ between the implant types

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented times worldwide. From lockdowns to masks now being part of our everyday routine, to the halting of elective surgeries, the virus has touched everyone and every part of our personal and professional lives. Perhaps, now more than ever, our ability to adapt, change and persevere is critical to our survival. This year's closed meeting of The Knee Society demonstrated exactly those characteristics. When it became evident that an in-person meeting would not be feasible, The Knee Society leadership, under the direction of President John Callaghan, MD and Program Chair Craig Della Valle, MD created a unique and engaging meeting held on September 10–12, 2020. Special recognition should be given to Olga Foley and Cynthia Garcia at The Knee Society for their flexibility and creativeness in putting together a world-class flawless virtual program. The Bone & Joint Journal is very pleased to partner with The Knee Society to once again publish the proceedings of the closed meeting of the Knee Society. The Knee Society is a United States based society of highly selected members who have shown leadership in education and research in knee surgery. It invites up to 15% international members; this includes some of the key opinion leaders in knee surgery from outside the USA. Each year, the top research papers from The Knee Society meeting will be published and made available to the wider orthopaedic community in The Bone & Joint Journal. The first such proceedings were published in BJJ in 2019. International dissemination should help to fulfil the mission and vision of the Knee Society of advancing the care of patients with knee disorders through leadership, education and research. The quality of dissemination that The Bone & Joint Journal provides should enhance the profile of this work and allow a larger body of surgeons, associated healthcare professionals and patients to benefit from the expertise of the members of The Knee Society. The meeting is one of the highlights of the annual academic calendar for knee surgeons. With nearly every member in attendance virtually throughout the 3 days, the top research papers from the membership were presented and discussed in a virtual format that allowed for lively interaction and discussion. There are 75 abstracts presented. More selective proceedings with full papers will be available after a robust peer review process in 2021, both online and in The Bone & Joint Journal. The meeting commenced with the first group of scientific papers focused on Periprosthetic Joint Infection. Dr Berry and colleagues from the Mayo Clinic further help to clarify the issue of serology and aspirate results to diagnose TKA PJI in the acute postoperative setting. 177 TKA's had an aspiration within 12 weeks and 22 were proven to have PJI. Their results demonstrated that acute PJI after TKA should be suspected within 6 weeks if CRP is ≥81 mg/L, synovial WBCs are ≥8500 cells/μL, and/or synovial neutrophils≥86%. Between 6– 12 weeks, concerning thresholds include a CRP ≥ 32 mg/L, synovial WBC ≥7450, and synovial neutrophils ≥ 84%. While historically the results of a DAIR procedure for PJI have been variable, Tom Fehring's study showed promise with the local delivery of vancomycin through the Intraosseous route improved early results. New member Simon Young contrasted the efficacy of the DAIR procedure when comparing early infections to late acute hematogenous PJI. DAIR failed in 63% of late hematogenous PJIs (implant age>1 year) compared to 36% of early (<1year) PJIs. Dr Masri demonstrated in a small group of patients that those with well-functioning articulating spacers can retain their spacers for over 12 months with no difference in infection from those that had a formal two stage exchange. The mental toll of PJI was demonstrated in a longitudinal study by Doug Dennis, where patient being treated with 2 stage exchange had 4x higher rates of depression compared to patient undergoing aseptic revision. The second session focused on both postoperative issues with regards to anticoagulation and manipulation. Steven Haas demonstrated high complication rates with utilization of anticoagulation for treatment of postoperative pulmonary embolism with modern therapeutic anticoagulation (warfarin, enoxaparin, Xa inhibitors) with the Xa inhibitors demonstrating lower complication rates. Two papers focused on the topic of manipulation. Mark Pagnano presented data on timing of manipulation under anesthesia up to even past 12 months. While gains were modest, a subset of patients did achieve substantial gains in ROM > 20degrees even after 3 months post op. Dr Westrich's study demonstrated no difference in MUA outcomes with either IV sedation or neuraxial anesthesia although the length of stay was shorter in the IV sedation group. Several studies in Session II focused on kinematics and femoral component position. Dr Li's in vivo kinematic study during weightbearing flexion and gait demonstrated that several knees rotated with a lateral pivot motion and not all knees can be described with a single motion character. Dr Mayman and his group utilized a computational knee model to demonstrate that additional distal femoral resection results in increasing levels of mid -flexion instability and cautioned against the use of additional bony resection as the first line for flexion contractures. Using computer navigation, Dr Huddleston's study nicely outlined the variability in femoral component rotation to achieve a rectangular flexion gap utilizing a gap balanced method. The third session opened the meeting on Friday morning. The focus was on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and the increasing utilization of robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty. David Murray showed using registry data that for patient with higher comorbidities (ASA >3), UKA was safer and more cost effective than TKA while Dr Della Valle's group demonstrated overall lower average healthcare costs in UKA patients compared to TKA in the first 10 years after surgery. Dr Geller assessed UKA survivorship among 3 international registries. While survivorship varied by nation and designs, certain designs consistently had better overall performance. Dr Nunley and his group showed robotic navigation UKA significantly reduced outliers in alignment and overhang compared to manual UKA. Dr Catani's data demonstrated that full thickness cartilage loss should still be considered a requirement for UKA success even with robotic assistance. Despite a high dislocation rate of 4%, Mr Dodd demonstrated high survivorship for lateral UKA despite historical contraindications. The growing evidence for robotics TKA was demonstrated in two studies. Professor Haddad showed less soft tissue injury, reduced bone trauma and improved accuracy or rTKA compared to manual TKA while Dr Gustke single surgeon study showed his rTKA had improved forgotten joint scores and less ligament releasing required for balancing. Despite these finding, Dr Lee's study demonstrated that a robotic TKA could not guarantee excellent pain relief and other factors such a patient expectations and psychological factors play a role. Our fourth session was devoted to machine learning and smart tools and modeling. Dr Meneghini used machine learning algorithms to identify optimal alignment outcomes that correlated with patient outcomes. Several parameters such as native tibial slope, femoral sagittal position and coronal limb alignment correlated with outcomes. Along the same lines, Bozic and coauthors demonstrated that using AI algorithms incorporated with PROM's improved levels of shared decision making and patient satisfaction. Dr Lombardi demonstrated that a mobile patient engagement platform that provided smart phone-based exercise and education was comparable to traditional methods. Dr Mahfouz demonstrated the accuracy of using ultrasound to produce 3D models of the bone compared to conventional CT based strategies and Dr Mahoney showed the valued of a preop 3D model in reproducing more normal knee kinematics. The last two talks of the session focused on some of the positives of the COVID-19 pandemic, namely the embracing of telemedicine by patients and surgeons as demonstrated by Dr Slover and the increasing and far reaching educational opportunities made available to residents and fellows during the pandemic. Session five focused on risk stratification and optimization prior to TKA. Dr O'Connor demonstrated that that the implementation of an optimization program preoperatively reduced length of stay and ED visits, and Charles Nelson's study showed that risk stratification tool can lower complication rates in obese patients undergoing TKA comparable to those that are nonobese. Dr Markel's study demonstrated that those who have preoperative depression and anxiety are at higher risk of complications and readmissions after surgery and these issues should be addressed preoperatively. Interestingly, a study by Dr Callaghan demonstrated that care improvement pathways have not lowered the gap in complications for morbidly obese patients undergoing TKA, Dr Barsoum argued that the overall complication rates were low and this patient cohort had significant gains in PROMS after TKA that would not be experienced if arbitrary cutoff for limited surgery were established. The final session on Friday, Session six, had several well done and interesting studies. There continues to be mounting evidence that liposomal bupivacaine has little effect on managing post-operative pain to warrant its increased use. Bill Macaulay and colleagues showed no change in pain scores, opioid consumption and functional scores when liposomal bupivacaine was discontinued at a large academic medical center. Dr Bugbee importantly demonstrated that a supervised ambulation program reduced falls in the early postoperative period. Several paper on healthcare economics were presented. Rich Iorio showed that stratifying complexity of total joint cases between hospitals with a system can be efficient and cost savings while Dr Jiranek demonstrated in his study that complex TKAs can be identified preoperatively and are associated with prolonged operative time and cost of care and consideration should be given in future reimbursement models to a complexity modifier. Dr Springer, in their evaluation of Medicare bundled payment models, demonstrated that providers and hospitals in historical bundled models that became efficient were penalized in the new model, forcing many groups to drop out and return to a fee for service model. Ron Delanois important work showed that social determinants can have a major negative impact on outcomes following TKA. Our final day on Saturday opened with Session seven, and several interesting paper on metal ions/debris in TKA. Dr Whitesides simulator study showed the absence of scratches and material loss in a ceramic TKA compared with Co-Cr TKA and suggested an advantage to this material in patients with metal sensitivity. Conversely, in a histological study of failed TKA, perivascular lymphocytic infiltration was not associated with worse clinical outcomes or differences in revision in a series of 617 aseptic revisions, 19% of which had PVLI found on histology. The Mayo group and Dr Trousdale however, noted that serum metal ion levels can be helpful in identifying implant failure in a group of revision TKAs, especially those with metallic junctions. Dr Dalury demonstrated nicely that use of maximally conforming inserts did not have a negative effect on implant loosening in a series of 76 revision TKA's at an average follow up of 7 years, while Kevin Garvin and his group showed no difference in end of stem pain between cemented and cementless stems in revision TKA. The final two studies in the session by Bolognesi and Peters respectively showed that metaphyseal cones continue to demonstrate excelled survivorship in rTKA setting despite extensive bone loss. Session eight was highlighted by a large series of revision reported by new member Dr Schwarzkopf, who showed that revision TKA done by high volume surgeons demonstrated better outcomes and lower revision rates compared to surgeon who did less than 18 rTKA's per year. Dr Maniar importantly showed that preoperatively, patients with high activity level and low pain and indicated by a high preop forgotten joint score did poorly following TKA while David Ayers nicely demonstrated that KOOS scores that assess specific postoperative outcomes can predict patient dissatisfaction after TKA. The final paper in this session by Max Courtney showed that the majority of surgical cancellations are due to medical issues, yet a minority of these undergo any intervention specifically for that condition, but they resulted in a delay of 5 months. The first two studies of Session nine focused on polyethylene thickness. Dr Backstein demonstrated no difference in KSS scores, change in ROM and aseptic revision rates based on polyethylene thickness in a series of 195 TKA's. An interesting lab study by Dr Tim Wright showed a surprising consistency in liner thickness choice among varying levels of surgeon experience that did not correlate with applied forces or gap stability estimates. Two studies looked specifically at the issue of tibial loosening and implant design. Nam and colleagues were not able to demonstrate concerning findings for increasing tibial loosening in a tibial baseplate with a shortened tibial keel at short term follow up, while Lachiewicz demonstrated a 19% revision or revision pending rate in 223 cemented fixed bearing ATTUNE TKA at a mean of 30 months. Our final session of the meeting, began with encouraging news, that despite only currently capturing about 40% of TJA's done in the US, the American Joint Replacement Registry data is representative of data in other representative US databases. An interesting study presented by Robert Barrack looked at bone remodeling in the proximal tibia after cemented and cementless TKA of two different designs. No significant difference was noted among the groups with the exception of the cemented thicker cobalt chrome tray which demonstrated significantly more bone mineral density loss. Along the same lines, a study out of Dr Bostrom's lab demonstrated treatment of a murine tibial model with iPTH prevents fibrous tissue formation and enhances bone formation in cementless implants. New Member Jamie Howard showed no difference in implant migration and kinematics of a single radius cementless design using either a measured resection or gap balancing technique and Dr Cushner show no difference in blood loss with cemented or cementless TKA with the use of TKA. The final two studies looked at staging and bilateral TKA's. Peter Sharkey showed that simultaneous TKA's were associated with higher complication compared to staged TKA and that staged TKA with less than a 90-day interval was not associated with higher risk. However, Mark Figgie showed that patients undergoing simultaneous TKA compared to staged TKA, missed 17 fewer days of work. In spite of the virtual nature of the meeting, there were some outstanding scientific interactions and the material presented will continue to generate debate and to guide the direction of knee arthroplasty as we move forwards

Aims

Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) offers the potential for strong biological fixation compared with cemented TKA where fixation is achieved by the mechanical integration of the cement. Few mid-term results are available for newer cementless TKA designs, which have used additive manufacturing (3D printing). The aim of this study was to present mid-term clinical outcomes and implant survivorship of the cementless Stryker Triathlon Tritanium TKA.

Aims

Single-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is gaining popularity in treating chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). We have introduced this approach to our clinical practice and sought to evaluate rates of reinfection and re-revision, along with predictors of failure of both single- and two-stage rTKA for chronic PJI.