Aims. This study evaluates the association between consultant and hospital volume and the risk of re-revision and 90-day mortality following first-time revision of primary hip arthroplasty for aseptic loosening. Methods. We conducted a cohort study of first-time, single-stage revision hip arthroplasties (RHAs) performed for aseptic loosening and recorded in the National Joint Registry (NJR) data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man between 2003 and 2019. Patient identifiers were used to link records to national mortality data, and to NJR data to identify subsequent re-revision procedures. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models with restricted cubic splines were used to define associations between volume and outcome. Results. Among 12,961 RHAs there were 513 re-revisions within two years, and 95 deaths within 90 days of surgery. The risk of re-revision was highest for a consultant’s first RHA (hazard ratio (HR) 1.56 (95% CI 1.15 to 2.12)) and remained significantly elevated for their first 24 cases (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.58)). Annual consultant volumes of five/year were associated with an almost 30% greater risk of re-revision (HR 1.28 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.64)) and 80% greater risk of 90-day mortality (HR 1.81 (95% CI 1.02 to 3.21)) compared to volumes of 20/year. RHAs performed at hospitals which had cumulatively undertaken fewer than 167 RHAs were at up to 70% greater risk of re-revision (HR 1.70 (95% CI 1.12 to 2.59)), and those having undertaken fewer than 307 RHAs were at up to three times greater risk of 90-day mortality (HR 3.05 (95% CI 1.19 to 7.82)). Conclusion. This study found a significantly higher risk of re-revision and early postoperative mortality following first-time single-stage RHA for aseptic loosening when performed by lower-volume consultants and at lower-volume institutions, supporting the move towards the centralization of such cases towards higher-volume units and surgeons. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1050–1058

Aims. This study describes the variation in the annual volumes of revision hip arthroplasty (RHA) undertaken by consultant surgeons nationally, and the rate of accrual of RHA and corresponding primary hip arthroplasty (PHA) volume for new consultants entering practice. Methods. National Joint Registry (NJR) data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man were received for 84,816 RHAs and 818,979 PHAs recorded between April 2011 and December 2019. RHA data comprised all revision procedures, including first-time revisions of PHA and any subsequent re-revisions recorded in public and private healthcare organizations. Annual procedure volumes undertaken by the responsible consultant surgeon in the 12 months prior to every index procedure were determined. We identified a cohort of ‘new’ HA consultants who commenced practice from 2012 and describe their rate of accrual of PHA and RHA experience. Results. The median annual consultant RHA volume, averaged across all cases, was 21 (interquartile range (IQR) 11 to 34; range 0 to 181). Of 1,695 consultants submitting RHA cases within the study period, the top 20% of surgeons by annual volume performed 74.2% of total RHA case volume. More than half of all consultants who had ever undertaken a RHA maintained an annual volume of just one or fewer RHA, however, collectively contributed less than 3% of the total RHA case volume. Consultant PHA and RHA volumes were positively correlated. Lower-volume surgeons were more likely to undertake RHA for urgent indications (such as infection) as a proportion of their practice, and to do so on weekends and public holidays. Conclusion. The majority of RHAs were undertaken by higher-volume surgeons. There was considerable variation in RHA volumes by indication, day of the week, and between consultants nationally. The rate of accrual of RHA experience by new consultants is low, and has important implications for establishing an experienced RHA consultant workforce. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(10):1060–1069

Aims. Patients with a high comorbidity burden (HCB) can achieve similar improvements in quality of life compared with low-risk patients, but greater morbidity may deter surgeons from operating on these patients. Whether surgeon volume influences total hip arthroplasty (THA) outcomes in HCB patients has not been investigated. This study aimed to compare complication rates and implant survivorship in HCB patients operated on by high-volume (HV) and non-HV THA surgeons. Methods. Patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5 and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade of III or IV, undergoing primary elective THA between January 2013 and December 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. Between groups, 90-day readmissions and revisions were compared, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate implant survivorship within the follow-up period. Results. 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) than 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 with 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) than the non-HV group. Conclusion. The HCB THA patients have fewer 90-day readmissions, all-cause revisions, and septic revisions, as well as shorter length of stay when treated by HV surgeons. THA candidates with a HCB may benefit from referral to HV surgeons to reduce procedural risk and improve postoperative outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3 Supple A):10–16

Aims. To investigate the experience and emotional impact of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) on orthopaedic surgeons and identify holistic strategies to improve the management of PJI and protect surgeons’ wellbeing. Methods. In total, 18 prosthetic joint surgeons in Sweden were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. Content analysis was performed on transcripts of individual in-person interviews conducted between December 2017 and February 2018. Results. PJI had a negative emotional impact on Swedish surgeons. Many felt guilt, stress, and a sense of failure, and several aspects of PJI management were associated with psychosocial challenges. Peer support was reported as the most important coping strategy as was collaborating with infectious disease specialists. Conclusion. Our study affirms that there is a negative emotional impact of PJI on surgeons which can be minimized by improved peer support and working in multidisciplinary teams. Based on the surgeons’ experiences we have identified desired improvements that may facilitate the management of PJI. These may also be applicable within other surgical specialties dealing with postoperative infections, but need to be evaluated for their efficacy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):736–743

Abstract. The Montgomery ruling advocates patients be informed of ‘material risks’ of a procedure. With no guidelines for patients wishing to return to high activity levels after knee arthroplasty, we explore patient and surgeon perceptions in climbers. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Central Lancashire. Anonymous questionnaires were sent via email and social media to consultant knee arthroplasty surgeons and to climbers/mountaineers across the UK. Consultants were asked about advice given for patients who participate in climbing. Climbers were asked about their experiences of knee arthroplasty and return to activity. Of 33 knee arthroplasty surgeons, 11(33%) were firmly against any return to climbing, 10(30%) counselled against it, and 12(36%) were open to return to previous activity. Of 11(33%) surgeons who do not gather information about levels of climbing, 8 would not provide specific advice regarding risks of returning to sport. Of 28 climbers, only 5(18%) were informed to cease completely, with 11(39%) cautioned against and 12(43%) permitted to return. There was no correlation between the advice received and climbing ability post-operatively, (kappa=0.143,p=0.058), with a substantial agreement between ability 1-year post-operatively and currently, (kappa=0.689,p<0.001). There is a discrepancy between the advice given and received by climbers/mountaineers prior to knee arthroplasty, with ability post-operatively having no relationship to advice given. Climbing is possible at high level with no reported complications following knee arthroplasty. The 1-year time point is predictive of longer-term outcome. This information should help surgeons better inform their patients preoperatively

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

Introduction. The vast majority of orthopaedic surgeons use C-arm fluoroscopy in the operating theatre when building a circular external fixator. In the absence of previous research in this area, we hypothesised that the surgeon who builds a circular external fixator is exposed to a greater amount of radiation purely as a result of the presence of the metallic fixator in the x-ray beam. The aim of our study therefore was to investigate how the presence of a circular external fixator affects the radiation dose to the surgeon and the surgical assistant. Materials & Methods. A simulated environment was created using a radiolucent operating table, an acrylic lower limb phantom (below knee segment), various configurations of metalic circular external fixation, and a standard size C-arm image intensifier. The variables investigated were 1. the amount of metal in the beam 2. the orientation of the beam (PA vertical vs lateral) 3. the horizonal distance of the person from the beam (surgeon vs assistant) and 4. the vertical distance of the various body parts from the beam (e.g. thyroid, groin). In terms of radiation dose, we recorded two things : 1. the dose produced by the image intensifier 2. the dose rate at standardised positions in the operating theatre. The latter was done using a solid-state survey sensor. These positions represented both where the surgeon and surgical assistant typically stand plus the heights of their various body regions relative to the operating table. Results. The effect of the presence of the circular external fixator : all frame constructs tested resulted in a statistically significant greater radiation dose both produced by the image intensifier and received by the surgical team. The effect of the beam orientation : the PA (vertical) orientation resulted in a statistically significant greater radiation dose for the surgeon than did the lateral orientation, but made no difference for the assistant. The effect of horizontal distance from the beam : unsurprisingly, the surgeon (who was closer to the beam) received a statistically significant greater radiation dose than the assistant. The effect of vertical distance from the beam : for the surgeon, the dose received was highest at the level of the phantom leg / frame, whilst for the assistant there was no statistically significant difference for any level. Conclusions. To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the radiation dose rate to the orthopaedic surgeon when building a circular external fixator. We found that the surgeon does indeed receive a ‘double whammy’ because the image intensifier puts out a greater amount of radiation plus the metalic frame scatters more of the x-ray beam. Whilst the amounts are relatively small, we think that it's important to quantify doses that orthopaedic surgeons receive to ensure optimal radiation practices

The variables involved in a robotic THA can exceed 52: many parameters as pelvic orientation with CT scan, templating, offset, and leg-length, acetabular reaming, femoral osteotomy, mapping the anatomy; predefining safe zones, robotic execution, femoral head size, thickness of PE etc. with several variables for each parameter, with a total number of variables exceeding 52. This familiar number is the number of cards in a standard deck. The number of possible combinations (factorial 52! = 10^67) to shuffle the cards (and may be to perform a THA) is greater than the number of atoms on earth! Thinking that artificial intelligence and robotics can solve these problems, some surgeons and implant manufacturers have turned to artificial intelligence and robotics. We asked two questions:1) can robot with artificial intelligence really process 52 variables that represent 10^67 combinations? 2) the safety of the technology was ascertained by interrogating Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database about software-related recalls in computer-assisted and robotic arthroplasty [1], between 2017 and 2022. 1). The best computers can only calculate around 100 thousand billion combinations (10^14), and with difficulty: it takes more than 100 days to arrive at this number of digits (10^14) after the decimal point for the number π (pi). We can, therefore, expect the robot to be imperfect. 2). For the FDA software-related recalls, 4634 units were involved. The FDA determined root causes were: software design (66.6%), design change (22.2%), manufacturing deployment (5.6%), design manufacturing process (5.6%). Among the manufacturers’ reasons for recalls, a specific error was declared in 88.9%. a coding error in 43.8%. 94.4% software-related recalls were classified as class 2. Return of the device was the main action taken by firms (44.4%), followed by software update (38.9%). 3). In the same period, no robot complained about its surgeon!. Hip surgeon is as intelligent as a robot and almost twice as safe

Aims. Total hip arthroplasties (THAs) are performed by surgeons at various stages in training with varying levels of supervision, but we do not know if this is safe practice with comparable outcomes to consultant-performed THA. Our aim was to examine the association between surgeon grade, the senior supervision of trainees, and the risk of revision following THA. Methods. We performed an observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data. We included adult patients who underwent primary THA for osteoarthritis, recorded in the NJR between 2003 and 2016. Exposures were operating surgeon grade (consultant or trainee) and whether or not trainees were directly supervised by a scrubbed consultant. Outcomes were all-cause revision and the indication for revision up to ten years. We used methods of survival analysis, adjusted for patient, operation, and healthcare setting factors. Results. We included 603,474 THAs, of which 58,137 (9.6%) procedures were performed by a trainee. There was no association between surgeon grade and all-cause revision up to ten years (crude hazard ratio (HR) 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.07); p = 0.966), a finding which persisted with adjusted analysis. Fully adjusted analysis demonstrated an association between trainees operating without scrubbed consultant supervision and an increased risk of all-cause revision (HR 1.10 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.21); p = 0.045). There was an association between trainee-performed THA and revision for instability (HR 1.14 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.30); p = 0.039). However, this was not observed in adjusted models, or when trainees were supervised by a scrubbed consultant. Conclusion. Within the current training system in England and Wales, appropriately supervised trainees achieve comparable THA survival to consultants. Trainees who are supervised by a scrubbed consultant achieve superior outcomes compared to trainees who are not supervised by a scrubbed consultant, particularly in terms of revision for instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):341–351

Aims. It has previously been shown that higher-volume hospitals have better outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). We were unable to identify any studies which investigated the effect of surgeon volume on the outcome of rTKA. We sought to investigate whether patients of high-volume (HV) rTKA surgeons have better outcomes following this procedure compared with those of low-volume (LV) surgeons. Methods. This retrospective study involved patients who underwent aseptic unilateral rTKA between January 2016 and March 2019, using the database of a large urban academic medical centre. Surgeons who performed ≥ 19 aseptic rTKAs per year during the study period were considered HV and those who performed < 19 per year were considered LV. Demographic characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results. A total of 308 rTKAs were identified, 132 performed by HV surgeons and 176 by 22 LV surgeons. The LV group had a significantly greater proportion of non-smokers (59.8% vs 49.2%; p = 0.029). For all types of revision, HV surgeons had significantly shorter mean operating times by 17.75 minutes (p = 0.007). For the 169 full revisions (85 HV, 84 LV), HV surgeons had significantly shorter operating times (131.12 (SD 33.78) vs 171.65 (SD 49.88) minutes; p < 0.001), significantly lower re-revision rates (7.1% vs 19.0%; p = 0.023) and significantly fewer re-revisions (0.07 (SD 0.26) vs 0.29 (SD 0.74); p = 0.017). Conclusion. Patients of HV rTKA surgeons have better outcomes following full rTKA. These findings support the development of revision teams within arthroplasty centres of excellence to offer patients the best possible outcomes following rTKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):131–136

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

Introduction. Acetabular component orientation is an important determinant of outcome following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although surgeons aim to achieve optimal cup orientation, many studies demonstrate their inability to consistently achieve this. Factors that contribute are pelvic orientation and the surgeon's ability to correctly orient the cup at implantation. The goal of this study was to determine the accuracy with which surgeons can achieve cup orientation angles. Methods. In this in vitro study using a calibrated left and right sawbone hemipelvis model, participants (n=10) were asked to place a cup mounted on its introducer giving different targets. Measurements of cup orientation were made using a stereophotogrammetry protocol to measure radiographic inclination and operative anteversion (OA). A digital inclinometer was used to measure the intra-operative inclination (IOI) which is the angle of the cup introducer relative to the floor. First, the participant stated his or her preferred IOI and OA and positioned the cup accordingly. Second, the participant had to position the cup parallel to the anteversion of the transverse acetabular ligament (TAL). Third, the participant had to position the cup at IOI angles of 35°, 40° and 45°. Fourth, the participant used the mechanical alignment guide (45° of IOI and 30° of OA) to orient the cup. Each task was analysed separately and subgroup analysis included left versus right side and hip surgeons versus non-hip surgeons. Results. For the first task, hip surgeons preferred smaller IOI and larger OA than non-hip surgeons, but there was no significant difference in accuracy between both groups. When aiming for TAL, both surgeon groups performed similar, but accuracy on the non-dominant side was significantly better compared with the dominant side (mean deviation 0.6° SD 2.4 versus −2.6° SD 2.3) (p=0.004). When aiming for a specific IOI target of 35°, 40° or 45°, non-hip surgeons outperformed hip surgeons (mean deviation form target IOI 1.9° SD 2.7 versus −3.1° SD 3.8) (p<0.0001) with less variance (p=0.03). Contrary to version, accuracy on the dominant side was significantly better compared with the non-dominant side (mean deviation −0.4° SD 3.4 versus −2.1° SD 4.8). When using a mechanical guide, surgeons performed similar (0.6° SD 1.2 versus −0.4° SD 2.1 for inclination p=0.11 and −0.5° SD 2.6 versus −1.8° SD 3.3 for version p=0.22) and these values did not differ significantly from the actual IOI and OA of the mechanical guide. When using a mechanical guide, there was no difference in accuracy between the dominant and non-dominant side. Conclusion. There was no difference in accuracy between hip surgeons and non-hip surgeons when they aimed for their preferred IOI and OA or used a mechanical guide. When aiming for a specific IOI target, non-hip surgeons outperformed hip surgeons. Hip surgeons overestimate IOI and underestimate OA, presumably because this helps to achieve the desired radiographic cup orientation. Regarding accuracy, the non-dominant side was better for version and the dominant side for inclination. When aiming for a specific IOI and OA target, using a mechanical guide is significantly better than freehand cup orientation

Introduction. Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) can be managed through a variety of different surgical approaches from closed reduction to simple tenotomies of the adductors and through to osteotomies of the femur and pelvis. The rate of redislocation following open reduction for the treatment of DDH may be affected by the number of intraoperative surgeons. Materials and methods. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 109 patients who underwent open reduction with or without bony osteotomies as a primary intervention between 2013 and 2023. We measured the number of redislocations and number of operating surgeons (either 1 or 2 operating surgeons) to assess for any correlation. 109 patients were identified and corresponded to 121 primary hip operations, the mean age at operation was 82.2 months (range 6 to 739 months). During the 10-year period 7 hip redislocations were identified. Results. Of the 7 redislocated hips, the rate of redislocation was found to be higher in patients who had undergone surgery via a single surgeon (5 redislocations) compared to the dual surgeon cohort (2 redislocations), though this did not reach statistical significance. Redislocation was more common in female patients and right laterality 7.2% and 8.7% respectively, though this again did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions. We conclude that a single surgeon approach, female gender and right laterality are potential risk factors for redislocation following open reduction. Further investigation utilising a larger sample size would be required to appropriately explore these potential risk factors further

Abstract. MAGnetic Expansion Control (MAGEC) rods are used in the surgical treatment of children with early onset scoliosis. The magnetically controlled lengthening mechanism enables rod distractions without the need for repeated invasive surgery. The CE certification of these devices was suspended in March 2021 due, primarily, to performance evidence gaps in the documents provided by the manufacturer to regulators and notified bodies. MAGEC rods are therefore not permitted for use in countries requiring CE marking. This was a survey of 18 MAGEC rod surgeons in the UK about their perception of the impact of the CE suspension on the clinical management of their patients. Unsurprisingly, virtually all perceived a negative impact, reflecting the complexity of this patient group. Reassuringly, these surgeons are highly experienced in alternative treatment methods. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):155–157

Continuous technical improvement in spinal surgical procedures, with the aim of enhancing patient outcomes, can be assisted by the deployment of advanced technologies including navigation, intraoperative CT imaging, and surgical robots. The latest generation of robotic surgical systems allows the simultaneous application of a range of digital features that provide the surgeon with an improved view of the surgical field, often through a narrow portal. There is emerging evidence that procedure-related complications and intraoperative blood loss can be reduced if the new technologies are used by appropriately trained surgeons. Acceptance of the role of surgical robots has increased in recent years among a number of surgical specialities including general surgery, neurosurgery, and orthopaedic surgeons performing major joint arthroplasty. However, ethical challenges have emerged with the rollout of these innovations, such as ensuring surgeon competence in the use of surgical robotics and avoiding financial conflicts of interest. Therefore, it is essential that trainees aspiring to become spinal surgeons as well as established spinal specialists should develop the necessary skills to use robotic technology safely and effectively and understand the ethical framework within which the technology is introduced. Traditional and more recently developed platforms exist to aid skill acquisition and surgical training which are described. The aim of this narrative review is to describe the role of surgical robotics in spinal surgery, describe measures of proficiency, and present the range of training platforms that institutions can use to ensure they employ confident spine surgeons adequately prepared for the era of robotic spinal surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(5):568–572

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)

Aims. Neither a surgeon’s intraoperative impression nor the parameters of computer navigation have been shown to be predictive of the outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to determine whether a surgeon, with robotic assistance, can predict the outcome as assessed using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for pain (KPS), one year postoperatively, and establish what factors correlate with poor KOOS scores in a well-aligned and balanced TKA. Methods. A total of 134 consecutive patients who underwent TKA using a dynamic ligament tensioning robotic system with a tibia first resection technique and a cruciate sacrificing ultracongruent TKA system were enrolled into a prospective study. Each TKA was graded based on the final mediolateral ligament balance at 10° and 90° of flexion: 1) < 1 mm difference in the thickness of the tibial insert and that which was planned (n = 75); 2) < 1 mm difference (n = 26); 3) between 1 mm to 2 mm difference (n = 26); and 4) > 2 mm difference (n = 7). The mean one-year KPS score for each grade of TKA was compared and the likelihood of achieving an KPS score of > 90 was calculated. Finally, the factors associated with lower KPS despite achieving a high-grade TKA (grade A and B) were analyzed. Results. Patients with a grade of A or B TKA had significantly higher mean one-year KPS scores compared with those with C or D grades (p = 0.031). There was no difference in KPS scores in grade A or B TKAs, but 33% of these patients did not have a KPS score of > 90. While there was no correlation with age, sex, preoperative deformity, and preoperative KOOS and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical scores, patients with a KPS score of < 90, despite a grade A or B TKA, had lower PROMIS mental health scores compared with those with KPS scores of > 90 (54.1 vs 50.8; p = 0.043). Patients with grade A and B TKAs with KPS > 90 were significantly more likely to respond with “my expectations were too low”, and with “the knee is performing better than expected” compared with patients with these grades of TKA who had a KPS score of < 90 (40% vs 22%; p = 0.004). Conclusion. A TKA balanced with robotic assistance to within 1 mm of difference between the medial and lateral sides in both flexion and extension had a higher KPS score one year postoperatively. Despite accurate ligament balance information, a robotic system could not guarantee excellent pain relief. Patient expectations and mental status also significantly affected the perceived success of TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):67–73

Introduction. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a physically demanding procedure where the surgeon is subject to fatigue with increased energy expenditure comparable to exercise[1]. Robotic technologies have been introduced into operating rooms to assist surgeons with ergonomically challenging tasks and to reduce overall physical stress and fatigue[2]. Greater exposure to robotic assisted training may create efficiencies that may reduce energy expenditure[3]. The purpose of this study was to assess surgeon energy expenditure during THA and perceived mental and physical demand. Methods. 12 THAs (6 cadavers) randomized by BMI were performed by two surgeons with different robotic assisted experience. Surgeon 1 (S1) had performed over 20 robotic assisted THAs on live patients and Surgeon 2 (S2) had training on 1 cadaver with no patient experience. For each cadaver, laterality was randomized and manual total hip arthroplasty (MTHA) was performed first on one hip and robotic assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) on the contralateral hip. A biometric shirt collected surgeon data on caloric energy expenditure (CEE) throughout acetabular reaming (AR) and acetabular implantation (AI) for each THA procedure. Surgeon mental and physical demand was assessed after each surgery. Scores were reported from 1–10, with 10 indicating high demand. A paired sample t-test was performed between MTHA and RATHA within each surgeon group with a confidence interval of (α =0.05). Results. Each surgeon demonstrated greater CEE during MTHA, Figure 1. Surgeon CEE during MTHA was greater for S1(100±28.1 cals) compared to RATHA(83.5±0.34 cals), with no significant difference (p>0.05, p=0.49). Energy expenditure was greater for S2 during MTHA(83.5±16.3 cals) compared to RATHA(75.3±0.71 cals) with no significance (p>0.05, p=0.68). RATHA resulted in a decrease in average CEE for each surgeon with a reduction of 16.5% for S1 and 9.8 % for S2. Surgeon task time during MTHA was greater for S1(14.7±3.2 mins) compared to RATHA(12.3±4.93 mins), with no significance (p>0.05, p=0.46). Average task time was greater for S2 during MTHA(10.0±2.65 mins) compared to RATHA(8.7±2.89 mins) with no significant differences (p>0.05, p=0.66). Average mental and physical demand was less for RATHA compared to MTHA, Figure 2. Average physical demand reported during AR for MTHA(5.5±1.2) was greater than RATHA(4.3±2.0, p=0.08). Average physical demand was greater for AI for MTHA(6±1.3) than RATHA(3.7±2.1, p=0.29). Average mental demand was significantly greater during AR for MTHA(5.7±1.03) when compared to RATHA(3.2±1.5, p=0.007). Average mental demand was greater during AI for MTHA(6.2±1.2) than RATHA(2.3±1.5, p=0.051). Conclusion. Regardless of prior surgical experience, both surgeons had reduced caloric expenditure when performing RATHA as compared to MTHA. For the surgeon with more RATHA experience, there was a greater percent reduction in caloric expenditure between surgical interventions. Both surgeons had similar percent reductions in time for RATHA compared to MTHA. Each surgeon noted increased mental and physical demand during MTHA. The trends suggest RATHA may reduce surgeon energy expenditure and time to perform acetabular reaming and implant insertion for THA. The pilot data suggests that there may be a relationship between energy expenditure and surgeon experience. This could be explored in future studies with a larger surgeon population. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Aim. There is a constant increase of total joint arthroplasties to improve the quality of life of an aging population. Prosthetic-joint infections are rare, with an incidence of 1–2%, but they represent serious complications in terms of morbidity and mortality. Different therapeutic options exist, but the role of the surgeon's experience has never been investigated. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the infection eradication success rate depending on the involvement of a septic surgeon. Method. Patients having a prosthetic-joint infection at Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) between 2006 and 2018 were included. The success rate depending on type of surgeon (septic vs non-septic) and type of surgical procedure was analyzed. Results. 444 patients (61% hips, 37% knees) were identified with a median age of 70 years. The overall success rate was 83% for septic surgeons compared to 61% for non-septic surgeons (p < 0.05). The effect of the surgeon was predominant in debridement with retention of the prosthesis where the experience could improve the success rate from 43% (non-septic) to 75% (septic) (p < 0.05). Conclusions. The involvement of a septic surgeon is associated with a significantly higher success rate, suggesting surgical experience is an important factor in treating prosthetic-joint infections