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. 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. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the provision of arthroplasty services in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. This study aimed to quantify the backlog, analyze national trends, and predict time to recovery. Methods. We performed an analysis of the mandatory prospective national registry of all independent and publicly funded hip, knee, shoulder, elbow, and ankle replacements in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland between January 2019 and December 2022 inclusive, totalling 729,642 operations. The deficit was calculated per year compared to a continuation of 2019 volume. Total deficit of cases between 2020 to 2022 was expressed as a percentage of 2019 volume. Sub-analyses were performed based on procedure type, country, and unit sector. Results. Between January 2020 and December 2022, there was a deficit of 158,994 joint replacements. This is equivalent to over two-thirds of a year of normal expected operating activity (71.6%). There were 104,724 (-47.1%) fewer performed in 2020, 41,928 (-18.9%) fewer performed in 2021, and 12,342 (-5.6%) fewer performed in 2022, respectively, than in 2019. Independent-sector procedures increased to make it the predominant arthroplasty provider (53% in 2022). NHS activity was 73.2% of 2019 levels, while independent activity increased to 126.8%. Wales (-136.3%) and Northern Ireland (-121.3%) recorded deficits of more than a year’s worth of procedures, substantially more than England (-66.7%). It would take until 2031 to eliminate this deficit with an immediate expansion of capacity over 2019 levels by 10%. Conclusion. The arthroplasty deficit following the COVID-19 pandemic is now equivalent to over two-thirds of a year of normal operating activity, and continues to increase. Patients awaiting different types of arthroplasty, in each country, have been affected disproportionately. A rapid and significant expansion in services is required to address the deficit, and will still take many years to rectify. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):834–841

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

Aims. Successful cell therapy in hip osteonecrosis (ON) may help to avoid ON progression or total hip arthroplasty (THA), but the achieved bone regeneration is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate amount and location of bone regeneration obtained after surgical injection of expanded autologous mesenchymal stromal cells from the bone marrow (BM-hMSCs). Methods. A total of 20 patients with small and medium-size symptomatic stage II femoral head ON treated with 140 million BM-hMSCs through percutaneous forage in the EudraCT 2012-002010-39 clinical trial were retrospectively evaluated through preoperative and postoperative (three and 12 months) MRI. Then, 3D reconstruction of the original lesion and the observed postoperative residual damage after bone regeneration were analyzed and compared per group based on treatment efficacy. Results. The mean preoperative lesion volume was 18.7% (SD 10.2%) of the femoral head. This reduced to 11.6% (SD 7.5%) after three months (p = 0.015) and 3.7% (SD 3%) after one year (p < 0.001). Bone regeneration in healed cases represented a mean 81.2% (SD 13.8%) of the initial lesion volume at one year. Non-healed cases (n = 1 stage progression; n = 3 THAs) still showed bone regeneration but this did not effectively decrease the ON volume. A lesion size under mean 10% (SD 6%) of the femoral head at three months predicted no ON stage progression at one year. Regeneration in the lateral femoral head (C2 under Japanese Investigation Committee (JCI) classification) and in the central and posterior regions of the head was predominant in cases without ON progression. Conclusion. Bone regeneration was observed in osteonecrotic femoral heads three months after expanded autologous BM-hMSC injection, and the volume and location of regeneration indicated the success of the therapy. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(12):881–889

Aims. The aim of this study was to measure the effect of hospital case volume on the survival of revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). Methods. This is a retrospective analysis of Scottish Arthroplasty Project data, a nationwide audit which prospectively collects data on all arthroplasty procedures performed in Scotland. The primary outcome was RTKA survival at ten years. The primary explanatory variable was the effect of hospital case volume per year on RTKA survival. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine the lifespan of RTKA. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards were used to estimate relative revision risks over time. Hazard ratios (HRs) were reported with 95% CI, and p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. From 1998 to 2019, 8,301 patients (8,894 knees) underwent RTKA surgery in Scotland (median age at RTKA 70 years (interquartile range (IQR) 63 to 76); median follow-up 6.2 years (IQR 3.0 to 10.2). In all, 4,764 (53.6%) were female, and 781 (8.8%) were treated for infection. Of these 8,894 knees, 957 (10.8%) underwent a second revision procedure. Male sex, younger age at index revision, and positive infection status were associated with need for re-revision. The ten-year survival estimate for RTKA was 87.3% (95% CI 86.5 to 88.1). Adjusting for sex, age, surgeon volume, and indication for revision, high hospital case volume was significantly associated with lower risk of re-revision (HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.94, p < 0.001)). The risk of re-revision steadily declined in centres performing > 20 cases per year; risk reduction was 16% with > 20 cases; 22% with > 30 cases; and 28% with > 40 cases. The lowest level of risk was associated with the highest volume centres. Conclusion. The majority of RTKA in Scotland survive up to ten years. Increasing yearly hospital case volume above 20 cases is independently associated with a significant risk reduction of re-revision. Development of high-volume tertiary centres may lead to an improvement in the overall survival of RTKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):602–609

To identify the incidence of a cortical breech on the initial presentation X-rays of patients with distal femoral GCTs, and whether this lead to a higher rate of local recurrence of tumour, a prospective database is kept of all patients seen in the unit. Initial presentation X-rays on 54 patients with distal femroal GCTs were reviewed. The size of the tumour was estimated by measuring the largest dimensions of the tumour (depth, breadth & height). The volume of the distal femur was estimated using the same X-ray and computer programme. The X-rays were then carefully studied for evidence of a cortical breach. The records were also checked for evidence of subsequent locally recurrent disease and subsequent surgery. X-rays were reviewed on 54 patients (29 male, 25 female), range of 18–72 years. All patients had a biopsy-proven GCT of the distal femur, X-rays (prior to biopsy) were reviewed. 34 (63%) patients with a cortical breech on X-ray. The mean tumour volume: distal femoral volumes (TV:DFV) was statistically greater between those patients with a cortical breach and those without, using ANOVA (p< 0.0001). There were 13 patients with local recurrent disease but no statistical difference in subsequent local recurrence rates between the two patient groups. There was also no statistical differences between the number of operations for those who presented with a cortical breach or without. There was no evidence that more radical surgery was required if a patient presented with a cortical breach. The risk of cortical breech in patients with GCTs of the distal femur is dependant upon the tumour volume to distal femur volume ratio. If the ratio is above 54% then present with a cortical breech on X-ray is likely (95% confidence interval).There is no evidence those patients with a cortical breach have a higher rate of local recurrence, an increased number of operations or more radical surgery. Conclusion: The risk of cortical breech in patients with GCTs of the distal femur is dependent upon the tumour volume to distal femur volume ratio

Surgery performed in low-volume centres has been associated with longer operating time, longer hospital stays, lower functional outcomes, and higher rates of revision surgery, complications, and mortality. This has been reported consistently in the arthroplasty literature, but there is a paucity of data regarding the relationship between surgical volume and outcome following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare the ACL reconstruction failure rate between hospitals performing different annual surgical volumes. The hypothesis was that ACL reconstructions performed at low-volume hospitals would be associated with higher failure rates than those performed at high-volume centres. This level-II cohort study included all patients from the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry that underwent isolated primary autograft ACL reconstruction between 2004 and 2016. Hospital volume was divided into quintiles based on the number of ACL reconstructions performed annually, defined arbitrarily as: 1–12 (V1), 13–24 (V2), 25–49 (V3), 50–99 (V4), and ≥100 (V5) annual procedures. Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves and survival percentages were calculated with revision ACL reconstruction as the end point. Mean change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Quality of Life and Sport subsections from pre-operative to two-year follow-up were compared using t-test. 19,204 patients met the inclusion criteria and 1,103 (5.7%) underwent subsequent revision ACL reconstruction over the study period. Patients in the lower volume categories (V1-3) were more often male (58–59% vs. 54–55% p=<0.001) and older (27 years vs. 24–25 years, p=<0.001) compared to the higher volume hospitals (V4-5). Concomitant meniscal injuries (52% vs. 40%) and participation in pivoting sports (63% vs. 56%) were most common in V5 compared with V1 (p=<0.001). Median operative time decreased as hospital volume increased, ranging from 90 minutes at V1 hospitals to 56 minutes at V5 hospitals (p=<0.005). Complications occurred at a rate of 3.8% at low-volume (V1) hospitals versus 1.9% at high-volume (V5) hospitals (p=<0.001). Unadjusted 10-year survival with 95% confidence intervals for each hospital volume category were: V1 – 95.1% (93.7–96.5%), V2 – 94.1% (93.1–95.1%), V3 – 94.2% (93.6–94.8%), V4 – 92.6% (91.8–93.4%), and V5 – 91.9% (90.9–92.9%). There was no difference in improvement between pre-operative and two-year follow-up KOOS scores between hospital volume categories. Patients having ACL reconstruction at lower volume hospitals did not have inferior clinical or patient reported outcomes, and actually demonstrated a lower revision rate. Complications occurred more frequently however, and operative duration was longer. The decreased revision rate is an interesting finding that may be partly explained by the fact that patients being treated in these small, often rural hospitals, may be of lower demand as suggested by the increased age and decreased participation in pivoting sports. In addition, patients with more complicated pathology such as meniscal tears were more commonly treated in the larger volume hospitals. The most significant limitation of this study is that provider volume was not assessed, and the number of surgeons dividing up the surgical volume at each hospital is not known

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

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

Aims. Hospital case volume is shown to be associated with postoperative outcomes in various types of surgery. However, conflicting results of volume-outcome relationship have been reported in hip fracture surgery. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the association between hospital case volume and postoperative outcomes in patients who had hip fracture surgery. We hypothesized that higher case volume would be associated with lower risk of in-hospital and one-year mortality after hip fracture surgery. Methods. Data for all patients who underwent surgery for hip fracture from January 2008 to December 2016 were extracted from the Korean National Healthcare Insurance Service database. According to mean annual case volume of surgery for hip fracture, hospitals were classified into very low (< 30 cases/year), low (30 to 50 cases/year), intermediate (50 to 100 cases/year), high (100 to 150 cases/year), or very high (> 150 cases/year) groups. The association between hospital case volume and in-hospital mortality or one-year mortality was assessed using the logistic regression model to adjust for age, sex, type of fracture, type of anaesthesia, transfusion, comorbidities, and year of surgery. Results. Between January 2008 and December 2016, 269,535 patients underwent hip fracture surgery in 1,567 hospitals in Korea. Compared to hospitals with very high volume, in-hospital mortality rates were significantly higher in those with high volume (odds ratio (OR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval ((CI) 1.02 to 1.17, p = 0.011), low volume (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.32, p < 0.001), and very low volume (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.34, p < 0.001). Similarly, hospitals with lower case volume showed higher one-year mortality rates compared to hospitals with very high case volume (low volume group, OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.19, p < 0.001; very low volume group, OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.14, p < 0.001). Conclusion. Higher hospital case volume of hip fracture surgery was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality in a dose-response fashion. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(10):1384–1391

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a national suspension of “non-urgent” elective hip and knee arthroplasty. The study aims to measure the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) volume in Scotland. Secondary objectives are to measure the success of restarting elective services and model the time required to bridge the gap left by the first period of suspension. Methods. A retrospective observational study using the Scottish Arthroplasty Project dataset. All patients undergoing elective THAs and TKAs during the period 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2020 were included. A negative binomial regression model using historical case-volume and mid-year population estimates was built to project the future case-volume of THA and TKA in Scotland. The median monthly case volume was calculated for the period 2008 to 2019 (baseline) and compared to the actual monthly case volume for 2020. The time taken to eliminate the deficit was calculated based upon the projected monthly workload and with a potential workload between 100% to 120% of baseline. Results. Compared to the period 2008 to 2019, primary TKA and THA volume fell by 61.1% and 53.6%, respectively. Since restarting elective services, Scottish hospitals have achieved approximately 40% to 50% of baseline monthly activity. With no changes in current workload, by 2021 there would be a reduction of 9,180 and 10,170 for THA and TKA, respectively. Conversely, working at 120% baseline monthly output, it would take over four years to eliminate the deficit for both TKA and THA. Conclusion. This national study demonstrates the significant impact that COVID-19 pandemic has had on overall THA and TKA volume. In the six months after resuming elective services, Scottish hospitals averaged less than 50% normal monthly output. Loss of operating capacity will increase treatment delays and likely worsen overall morbidity. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2021;2(3):203–210

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)

At our tertiary, large, academic healthcare system, we have access to an academic medical center (AMC), a community based, orthopedic friendly, efficient hospital (CBH) and several ambulatory care centers (ASC) which are being prepared to provide same day discharge (SDD) TJA and UKA. We had a near-capacity AMC with an excellent ability to care for medically and technically complicated TJA patients. However, efficiency was less than desired regardless of case complexity with an average effective case time of 4 hours. Concurrently, the orthopaedically, under-utilized community-based hospital (CBH) wanted to increase volume, improve margins, and become a TJA Center of Excellence with the ability to provide an efficient Hospital Outpatient Department (HOPD) and SDD TJA surgery experience. Methods. The CBH had a main operating floor and a separate floor of four OR suites which were repurposed with the goal of utilizing these rooms for TJA four days per week with an average of 3.5 cases per room per day. We preferentially performed primary, uncomplicated TJA, UKA, and minimally invasive TJA at the CBH. Revision surgeries, patients with extensive medical comorbidities, and complex primary surgeries would be performed at the AMC. Our goals were to decrease costs, readmissions, length of stay, and increase margins at the CBH while increasing efficiency, revenue and volume. Protocols were developed to facilitate SDD UKA and THA at both hospitals as well as rapid recovery protocols for TKA at both hospitals with the understanding that the CBH would perform more of these cases but the efficiency could also be implemented at the AMC when possible. We also needed a strategy to deal with TKA and eventually THA being removed from the Inpatient Only (IPO) list. CMS has utilized the “Two-Midnight Rule” to define outpatient status for both THA and TKA. This has distinct financial implications for the facility's reimbursement with outpatient being $10,123 on average versus $12,380 for inpatient status. A protocol-based system was put in place to make both hospitals compliant with the removal of TKA from the IPO List in order to avoid Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) and Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) after implementation. Results. Comparing FY 2018 to FY 2019, volume increased 26.4% at the CBH. Outpatient case volume rose substantially from 14 cases to 243. Volumes were slightly decreased at the AMC (−4.57%) resulting in a substantial increase in margin contribution for the parent enterprise. Quality metrics at the CBH (surgical site infections (SSI), length of stay (LOS), readmissions, and mortality) were improved. LOS improved from 52% to 71% discharge before 48 hours. The LOS decreased 12% for THA and 8.1% for TKA. CBH readmission rates decreased from 1.38% to 0.9% with no deaths. Surgeon satisfaction is greatly improved as their volume, efficiency, quality metrics, and finances were enhanced. Financial performance was improved in aggregate and per case for the CBH. Although the CBH per-case revenue was 80.3% and 74.4% of the AMC for THA and TKA: the net margins were 3.6% and 18.8% higher for THA and TKA, respectively. The increased efficiency, lower hospital cost and higher volume at the CBH allowed for an increase in revenue despite lower reimbursement per case. Conclusions. A shifting reimbursement landscape, value-based payment initiatives, and increasing volume have challenged traditional TJA delivery systems. This demonstrates one strategy to help hospital systems improve net margins while improving patient care despite lower net revenue per TJA episode. These strategies will become increasingly important going forward with the transition of higher numbers of TJA patients to outpatient settings including ambulatory surgery centers which will be subjected to even further decreases in net revenue per patient

Aims. The early diagnosis of cauda equina syndrome (CES) is crucial for a favourable outcome. Several studies have reported the use of an ultrasound scan of the bladder as an adjunct to assess the minimum post-void residual volume of urine (mPVR). However, variable mPVR values have been proposed as a threshold without consensus on a value for predicting CES among patients with relevant symptoms and signs. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis and systematic review of the published evidence to identify a threshold mPVR value which would provide the highest diagnostic accuracy in patients in whom the diagnosis of CES is suspected. Methods. The search strategy used electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and AMED) for publications between January 1996 and November 2021. All studies that reported mPVR in patients in whom the diagnosis of CES was suspected, followed by MRI, were included. Results. A total of 2,115 studies were retrieved from the search. Seven fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These included 1,083 patients, with data available from 734 being available for meta-analysis. In 125 patients, CES was confirmed by MRI. The threshold value of mPVR reported in each study varied and could be categorized into 100 ml, 200 ml, 300 ml, and 500 ml. From the meta-analysis, 200 ml had the highest diagnostic accuracy, with 82% sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.90) and 65% specificity (95% CI 0.70 to 0.90). When compared using summative receiver operating characteristic curves, mPVR of 200 ml was superior to other values in predicting the radiological confirmation of CES. Conclusion. mPVR is a useful tool when assessing patients in whom the diagnosis of CES is suspected. Compared with other values a mPVR of 200 ml had superior sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. In a patient with a suggestive history and clinical findings, a mPVR of > 200 ml should further raise the suspicion of CES. Caution is recommended when considering the mPVR in isolation and using it as an ‘exclusion tool’, and it should only be used as an adjunct to a full clinical assessment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):487–495

Introduction. Patient demand for hip and knee arthroplasty continues to rise. Information sources providing data on the volume and cost of Medicare total joint arthroplasty by hospital are of use to patients and healthcare professionals. Data have demonstrated that higher volume surgeons are associated with lower cost, morbidity, and mortality. The current study assesses if the same is true for hospitals. Methods. The Limited Data Set (LDS) from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) were used for this study. All elective, DRG 470 Total Hip Arthroplasties (THA) reported by CMS from the first quarter of 2013 through the second quarter of 2016 were included. Volume and part A Medicare payments over a 90-day period for the 20 highest volume hospitals in the US were analyzed. Cost associated with initial hospital stay and post discharge skilled nursing, home health, long term acute care, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and readmission was aggregated and analyzed. For each episode, demographic information (age, sex, and race), geographic location, and Elixhauser comorbidities were calculated to control for major confounding factors in the regression. Results. For the 20 highest volume centers in the US, total joint volume for CMS insured patients varied from 1104 to 5069. Average cost varied from $16,974 to $22,094. For the 20 highest volume cities in the US, total joint volume for CMS insured patients varied from 1,501 to 6,727. Average Medicare part A payment varied from $14,255 to $21,125. Readmission % varied from 3.9% to 8.2%. 90-day mortality varied from 0.0% to 0.57%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. The variation in volume between the top 20 centers in the US varies by more than a factor of 4 with the highest volume hospital having almost twice the volume as the second highest hospital. Part A payments, readmissions, and mortality also varied widely. Within the top 20 hospitals by volume, there does not appear to be a correlation between volume and cost

There is no optimal therapy to stop or cure chondral degeneration in osteoarthritis (OA). Beside cartilage, subchondral bone is involved. The often sclerotic bone is mechanically less solid which in turn influences negatively chondral quality. Microfracturing as therapeutic technique aims to enhance bone quality but is applied only in smaller cartilage lesions. The osteoproliferative properties of Magnesium (Mg) have been shown repeatedly. 1-3. The present study examined the influence of micro-scaled Mg cylinders compared to sole drilling in an OA model. Ten New Zealand White rabbits underwent anterior crucial ligament transection. During 12 weeks after surgery, the animals developed OA as previously described. 4. In a second surgery, half of the animals received 20 drill holes (ø 0.5mm) and the other half received 20 drill holes, which were additionally filled with one Mg cylinder each. Extracapsular plication was performed in all animals. During the follow-up of 8 weeks three µ-computed tomographic (µCT) scans were performed: immediately after surgery and after four and eight weeks. Changes of bone volume, trabecular thickness and bone density were calculated and compared. µCT evaluation showed an increase in bone volume and trabecular thickness in both groups. This increase was significantly higher in rabbits which received Mg cylinders showing thrice as high values for both parameters (bone volume: Mg group +44.5%, drilling group +15.1%, p≤0.025; trabecular thickness: Mg group +53.2%, drilling group +16.9%, p≤0.025). Also bone density increased in both groups, but on a distinctly lower level and with no significant difference. Although profound higher bone volume was found after implantation of Mg cylinders, µCT showed similar levels of bone density indicating adequate bone quality in this OA model. Macroscopic and histological evaluation of cartilage condition have to reveal possible impact on OA progression. Additionally, current examination implement different alloys and influence on lameness

Ewing Sarcoma is the second most common primary bone sarcoma in young patients, however, there remains geographical variation in the treatment of these tumours. All patients receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy and, in most cases, the soft tissue mass diminishes significantly in volume. Controversy surrounds whether to then treat the pre- or post-chemotherapy tumour volume. Many centres advocate either (1) resection of the pre-chemotherapy volume or (2) treatment of the pre-chemotherapy volume with radiation followed by resection of the post-chemotherapy volume. These approaches increase both the short and long-term morbidity for this young patient population. In this study, we retrospectively reviewed our experience resecting only the post-chemotherapy volume without the use of (neo)adjuvant radiotherapy. A retrospective analysis of all patients with Ewing Sarcoma treated at a tertiary orthopaedic oncology centre was conducted. All patients were treated as per the consensus opinion of the multidisciplinary tumour board. Demographic and oncological variables were collected from our institutional database. Presentation and re-staging MRI scans were reviewed to evaluate pre- and post-chemotherapy tumour volumes. Operative and pathology reports were utilized to determine the extent of the surgical resection. Outcome variables included local recurrence free-, metastasis free- and overall survival. Sixty-five patients were identified in our institutional database of which 56 did not receive (neo)adjuvant radiotherapy. Median age at diagnosis was 24 years (range 13–64), 60% of patients were male and 67.6% of tumours were located in the appendicular skeleton. All 56 patients not treated with radiotherapy had resection of the post-chemotherapy tumour volume. There were 3 local recurrences in this group with a mean follow-up of 70.8 months (range 2 to 328). The median overall survival was 47 months and the mean of 70.8months. The rate of local recurrence is comparable to reports in the literature in which patients had their entire pre-chemotherapy tumour volume treated by radiation and/or surgery. Similarly, two-year overall survival for our patient cohort is not significantly different from previous studies in which more aggressive local control measures were employed. Resecting the post-chemotherapy tumour volume in Ewing Sarcoma without the use of (neo)adjuvant radiotherapy does not appear to increase the risk of local recurrence or negatively impact overall survival. This approach should be studied further as it reduces the risk of short and long-term complications for this patient population.”

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 replacement for aseptic loosening. We conducted a cohort study of first-time, single-stage revision hip replacements (RHR) 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. Among 12,676 RHR 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 RHR (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1·58 (95%CI 1·16 to 2·15)) and remained significantly elevated for their first 26 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. RHR performed at hospitals which had cumulatively undertaken fewer than 168 RHR were at up to 70% greater risk of re-revision (HR 1·70 (95% CI 1·12 to 2·60)), and those having undertaken fewer than 309 RHR were at up to three times greater risk of 90-day mortality (HR 3·06 (95% CI 1·19 to 7·86)). This study found a significantly higher risk of re-revision and early postoperative mortality following first-time single-stage RHR for aseptic loosening when performed by lower-volume consultants and at lower-volume institutions, supporting the move towards the centralisation of such cases towards higher-volume units and surgeons