Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 88
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 91 - 91
1 Jul 2022
Jones CS Johansen A Inman D Eardley W Toms A Evans J
Full Access

Abstract. Introduction. Inter-prosthetic femoral fractures (IPFF) are fractures occurring between ipsilateral hip and knee implants or fixation devices. In 2020, the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was extended to capture data from patients with peri-prosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF), including those specifically with IPFF. This study aims to describe the epidemiology and treatment of IPFF in England and Wales. Methodology. This population-based observational cohort study utilised open-access data available from the NHFD. Patients aged over 60, admitted to an acute hospital in England or Wales with an IPFF, within the period 1st January 2020 to 31st December 2020 were included. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of IPFF in England and Wales. The secondary outcome was the treatment received. Results. Of 2606 patients admitted with PPFF, a total of 133 fractures occurred between ipsilateral hip and knee implants. Internal fixation was performed most frequently, in 87 cases. Revision arthroplasty was performed in 15 cases (hip n=10, knee n=5). A total of 20 patients were managed non-operatively, and three underwent primary arthroplasty (hip n=2, knee n=1). Conclusion. As the proportion of patients living with hip and knee implants continues to increase, it is expected that so too will the incidence of IPFF. This study is the first to estimate the incidence of IPFF in England and Wales. This is likely an underestimate of the true incidence and so we support calls for the prioritisation of further research into the epidemiology, prevention, and management of IPFF


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 92 - 92
1 Jul 2022
Jones CS Johansen A Inman D Eardley W Toms A Evans J
Full Access

Abstract. Introduction. In 2020, the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was extended to capture data from patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF) with plans to include these patients in Best Practice Tarif. We aimed to describe the epidemiology of PPFF in England and Wales, with a particular focus on fractures occurring around the femoral component of knee prostheses. Methodology. This population-based observational cohort study utilised open-access data available from the NHFD. Patients aged over 60, admitted to an acute hospital in England or Wales with a PPFF, within the period 1st January 2020 to 31st December 2020 were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPFF in England and Wales. The secondary outcome was the treatment received. Results. We identified 2606 patients with PPFF from 135 hospitals. Of these, a total of 578 fractures occurred around the femoral component of a knee implant. These were classified as Vancouver A (epicondylar, n=77), B (involving implant/cement, n=166) and C (proximal to implant/cement, n=335). Internal fixation was the most employed treatment, used in 352 cases. Revision arthroplasty was performed in 80 cases, and 100 were managed non-operatively. Only 28% of operated PPFF went to theatre within 36 hours but nearly 90% had orthogeriatrician review within 72 hours. Conclusion. Eighty six percent of patients with PPFF were treated with non-revision surgery and would not be recorded in the National Joint Registry. In response, we support calls for the prioritisation of further research into the prevention and management of PPFF around the knee


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXIX | Pages 34 - 34
1 Jul 2012
Brooks F Akram T Chandratreya A Roy S Pemberton D
Full Access

This study was designed to evaluate the performance of a new patient specific interpositional knee device. Treatment of osteoarthritis is evolving, allowing surgical treatment options at an earlier stage. The interpositional knee device is a recently developed patient specific implant used for the treatment of mild to moderate uni-compartmental osteoarthritis. The benefits over traditional methods of surgical management are: it's less invasive, can be a day procedure and does not limit future options. Young Adults with early uni-compartmental arthritis are suitable. A MRI scan of the patient's knee is reviewed by local and US radiologists to decide if the patient is suitable for the implant. A bespoke implant is produced. Prior to insertion an arthroscopic procedure is undertaken to allow proper positioning of the implant. We treated 27 patients with the iForma Conformis interpositional knee implant in South Wales at the Princess of Wales Hospital, Bridgend and the Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant since November 2007. The pre- and post-operative WOMAC scores were recorded. The average age was 54.7 years, BMI 32; 10 females and 20 males. The average pre-operative WOMAC score was 42.2 improving to 62.9 post-operatively. 35 implants were used. 7 patients experienced post-operative problems. No dislocations were reported. Average follow-up was 12.6 months. Our early experience suggests patient selection plays a role in the outcome following surgery. It indicates that this device is a viable and safe alternative to a uni-compartmental knee replacement


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 64 - 64
1 Jul 2022
Dayananda K Dalal S Thomas E Chandratreya A Kotwal R
Full Access

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

A paucity of literature exists regarding efficacy of lateral unloader bracing in treatment for pathologies effecting the lateral compartment of the knee.

We evaluate patient outcomes following customised lateral unloader bracing (cLUB) in treatment of lateral compartment osteoarthritis (LCOA), lateral tibial plateau fractures (LTPF) and spontaneous osteonecrosis of knee (SONK).

METHODS

Institutional study approval was obtained. All patients undergoing cLUB between January 2013 and January 2021 were included, and prospectively followed-up. Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) were assessed at brace fitting and final follow-up. Brace compliance, complications and surgical interventions were also collected. Statistical analysis utilised paired t-test.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXIX | Pages 82 - 82
1 Jul 2012
Baker PN Gregg PJ Deehan DJ
Full Access

Purpose

Little information is available relating to patient demographics, reasons for failure and types of implants used at time of revision following failure of patellofemoral joint (PFJ) replacement.

Methods and Results

Using data extracted from the NJR a series of 128 PFJ revisions in whom the index primary procedure was also recorded in the NJR were identified. This cohort therefore represents early failures of PFJ replacements revised over a 2 year period which were implanted after April 2003 and included revisions of 11 different brands of PFJ replacement from 6 different manufacturers.

The median age at primary procedure was 59.0 (Range 21.1 to 83.2) of which 43 patients were <55 years old (31 males, 97 females). 19% of the revisions were performed in the first year after implantation, in the second year in 33 cases (26%), in the third year in 39 cases (31%) and between years 4 to 7 in 32 patients (25%).

The commonest reasons for revision were pain (35%), aseptic loosening (18%), subluxation, dislocation or instability (11%), PE wear (7%) and component malalignment (6%). No reason for revision was stated in 30% and only 2 cases were revised for infection. Reason for revision differed according to year of failure but was consistent with respect to age at primary surgery. PFJ revision reason differed from those stated for revisions of primary UKR and TKR from the same period with pain being more prevalent and aseptic loosening and infection being less prevalent in the PFJ group. Single stage revision was performed in 124 cases and 118 underwent cemented revision.


Introduction

Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) offers advantages over total knee replacement but has higher revision rates particularly for aseptic loosening. Cementless UKR was introduced in an attempt to address this. We used National Joint Registry (NJR) data to compare the 10-year results of cemented and cementless mobile bearing UKR whilst matching for important patient, implant and surgical factors. We also explored the influence of caseload on outcome.

Methods

We performed a retrospective observational study using NJR data on 30,814 cemented and 9,708 cementless mobile bearing UKR implanted between 2004 and 2016. Logistic regression was utilised to calculate propensity scores allowing for matching of cemented and cementless groups for various patient, implant and surgical confounders, including surgeon's caseload, using a one to one ratio. 14,814 UKRs (7407 cemented and 7407 cementless) were propensity score matched. Outcomes studied were revision, defined as removal, addition or exchange of a component, and reasons for revision. Implant survival was compared using Cox regression models and groups were stratified according to surgeon caseload.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 9 | Pages 682 - 688
6 Sep 2023
Hampton M Balachandar V Charalambous CP Sutton PM

Aims. Aseptic loosening is the most common cause of failure following cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and has been linked to poor cementation technique. We aimed to develop a consensus on the optimal technique for component cementation in TKA. Methods. A UK-based, three-round, online modified Delphi Expert Consensus Study was completed focusing on cementation technique in TKA. Experts were identified as having a minimum of five years’ consultant experience in the NHS and fulfilling any one of the following criteria: a ‘high volume’ knee arthroplasty practice (> 150 TKAs per annum) as identified from the National joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man; a senior author of at least five peer reviewed articles related to TKA in the previous five years; a surgeon who is named trainer for a post-certificate of comletion of training fellowship in TKA. Results. In total, 81 experts (round 1) and 80 experts (round 2 and 3) completed the Delphi Study. Four domains with a total of 24 statements were identified. 100% consensus was reached within the cement preparation, pressurization, and cement curing domains. 90% consensus was reached within the cement application domain. Consensus was not reached with only one statement regarding the handling of cement during initial application to the tibial and/or femoral bone surfaces. Conclusion. The Cementing Techniques In Knee Surgery (CeTIKS) Delphi consensus study presents comprehensive recommendations on the optimal technique for component cementing in TKA. Expert opinion has a place in the hierarchy of evidence and, until better evidence is available these recommendations should be considered when cementing a TKA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):682–688


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 1 | Pages 47 - 55
1 Jan 2023
Clement ND Avery P Mason J Baker PN Deehan DJ

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify variables associated with time to revision, demographic details associated with revision indication, and type of prosthesis employed, and to describe the survival of hinge knee arthroplasty (HKA) when used for first-time knee revision surgery and factors that were associated with re-revision. Methods. Patient demographic details, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, indication for revision, surgical approach, surgeon grade, implant type (fixed and rotating), time of revision from primary implantation, and re-revision if undertaken were obtained from the National Joint Registry data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man over an 18-year period (2003 to 2021). Results. There were 3,855 patient episodes analyzed with a median age of 73 years (interquartile range (IQR) 66 to 80), and the majority were female (n = 2,480, 64.3%). The median time to revision from primary knee arthroplasty was 1,219 days (IQR 579 to 2,422). Younger age (p < 0.001), decreasing ASA grade (p < 0.001), and indications for revision of sepsis (p < 0.001), unexplained pain (p < 0.001), non-polyethylene wear (p < 0.001), and malalignment (p < 0.001) were all associated with an earlier time to revision from primary implantation. The median follow-up was 4.56 years (range 0.00 to 17.52), during which there were 410 re-revisions. The overall unadjusted probability of re-revision for all revision HKAs at one, five, and ten years after surgery were 2.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 3.3), 10.7% (95% CI 9.6 to 11.9), and 16.2% (95% CI 14.5 to 17.9), respectively. Male sex (p < 0.001), younger age (p < 0.001), revision for septic indications (p < 0.001) or implant fracture (p = 0.010), a fixed hinge (p < 0.001), or surgery performed by a non-consultant grade (p = 0.023) were independently associated with an increased risk of re-revision. Conclusion. There were several factors associated with time to first revision. The re-revision rate was 16.2% at ten years; however, the risk factors associated with an increased risk of re-revision could be used to counsel patients regarding their outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):47–55


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 4 | Pages 277 - 285
8 Apr 2024
Khetan V Baxter I Hampton M Spencer A Anderson A

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


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1331 - 1347
1 Nov 2019
Jameson SS Asaad A Diament M Kasim A Bigirumurame T Baker P Mason J Partington P Reed M

Aims. Antibiotic-loaded bone cements (ALBCs) may offer early protection against the formation of bacterial biofilm after joint arthroplasty. Use in hip arthroplasty is widely accepted, but there is a lack of evidence in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of ALBC in a large population of TKA patients. Materials and Methods. Data from the National Joint Registry (NJR) of England and Wales were obtained for all primary cemented TKAs between March 2003 and July 2016. Patient, implant, and surgical variables were analyzed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the influence of ALBC on risk of revision. Body mass index (BMI) data were available in a subset of patients. Results. Of 731 214 TKAs, 15 295 (2.1%) were implanted with plain cement and 715 919 (97.9%) with ALBC. There were 13 391 revisions; 2391 were performed for infection. After adjusting for other variables, ALBC had a significantly lower risk of revision for any cause (hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.93; p < 0.001). ALBC was associated with a lower risk of revision for all aseptic causes (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95; p < 0.001) and revisions for infection (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; p = 0.06). The results were similar when BMI was added into the model, and in a subanalysis where surgeons using only ALBC over the entire study period were excluded. Prosthesis survival at ten years for TKAs implanted with ALBC was 96.3% (95% CI 96.3 to 96.4) compared with 95.5% (95% CI 95.0 to 95.9) in those implanted with plain cement. On a population level, where 100 000 TKAs are performed annually, this difference represents 870 fewer revisions at ten years in the ALBC group. Conclusion. After adjusting for a range of variables, ALBC was associated with a significantly lower risk of revision in this registry-based study of an entire nation of primary cemented knee arthroplasties. Using ALBC does not appear to increase midterm implant failure rates. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1331–1347


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXIX | Pages 93 - 93
1 Jul 2012
Kempshall P Guro R Lewis M Mintowt-Czyz W Chandratreya A Roy W
Full Access

Aims. Wales in collaboration with the Welsh Assembly Government, has attempted to start a national ligament register. Introduction. Norway is the lead in Europe for running a successful national quality knee ligament registry. As yet there is no UK wide registry encompassing all forms of knee ligament surgery. The issue has been discussed at previous society meetings, but no consensus has been reached. Method. A pilot study covering three NHS Trusts in South Wales was run between April 2010 and September 2010. Data is gathered prospectively on non-operatively treated and surgically treated knee ligament injuries performed in the regions. This data is recorded on the WKLR form which is then sent to the WKLR centre and entered onto a secure database. Four knee surgeons agreed to take part in the study, from three NHS Health Boards. The data is recorded at the time of the operation on a tick box form akin to that used by the NJR. The prospectively gathered data is stored at the central registry office in Princess of Wales Hospital Bridgend. Results. A total of 68 forms were returned to the registry, 58 Males and 10 Females, average age 30 and 35 years respectively. Four per cent of ACL ruptures were treated non-operatively. Sixty two (96%) ACL ruptures were reconstructed; 57 primary reconstructions; 3 revisions; 2 were multi-ligament injuries. The most common mechanisms of injury in females were basketball and football. Rugby was the most common mechanism for males. Six PCL injuries were reported, half (3) were reconstructed, all using allograft Achilles tendon. Of the fifty seven primary ACL reconstructions, twenty nine (47%) ACL reconstructions were recorded with no meniscal injury, thirty (53%) of ACL reconstructions had concomitant meniscal injury, which equates to 8% requiring repair (5 medial, 1 lateral) and 25 (43%) requiring meniscectomy for non-repairable tears (15 medial, 10 Lateral). Cartilage lesions were seen in 18 reconstructions (27%). Of these 2 (3%) had synthetic mosaic plasty. Four lesions (6%) had chondroplasty and the remaining 12 (18%) treatment was not required but noted. Conclusion. The WKLR, although in its infancy, has shown that a ‘National Quality Database’ of this type is feasible and will provide the necessary quality assurance demanded by this active young group of patients. The WKLR will provide an invaluable research tool for assessing and comparing outcomes of the various techniques, graft types, and fixation devices. Failing implants can be identified early. Under performing institutions can be identified, and performance can be compared to the national average. All of these aims are focused at improving patient safety, satisfaction and outcome


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1506 - 1511
1 Nov 2015
Liddle AD Pandit H Judge A Murray DW

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has advantages over total knee arthroplasty but national joint registries report a significantly higher revision rate for UKA. As a result, most surgeons are highly selective, offering UKA only to a small proportion (up to 5%) of patients requiring arthroplasty of the knee, and consequently performing few each year. However, surgeons with large UKA practices have the lowest rates of revision. The overall size of the practice is often beyond the surgeon’s control, therefore case volume may only be increased by broadening the indications for surgery, and offering UKA to a greater proportion of patients requiring arthroplasty of the knee. . The aim of this study was to determine the optimal UKA usage (defined as the percentage of knee arthroplasty practice comprised by UKA) to minimise the rate of revision in a sample of 41 986 records from the for National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR). UKA usage has a complex, non-linear relationship with the rate of revision. Acceptable results are achieved with the use of 20% or more. Optimal results are achieved with usage between 40% and 60%. Surgeons with the lowest usage (up to 5%) have the highest rates of revision. With optimal usage, using the most commonly used implant, five-year survival is 96% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.9 to 96.0), compared with 90% (95% CI 88.4 to 91.6) with low usage (5%) previously considered ideal. . The rate of revision of UKA is highest with low usage, implying the use of narrow, and perhaps inappropriate, indications. The widespread use of broad indications, using appropriate implants, would give patients the advantages of UKA, without the high rate of revision. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1506–11


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 6 | Pages 793 - 801
1 Jun 2015
Liddle AD Pandit H Judge A Murray DW

Whether to use total or unicompartmental knee replacement (TKA/UKA) for end-stage knee osteoarthritis remains controversial. Although UKA results in a faster recovery, lower rates of morbidity and mortality and fewer complications, the long-term revision rate is substantially higher than that for TKA. The effect of each intervention on patient-reported outcome remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether six-month patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are better in patients after TKA or UKA, using data from a large national joint registry (NJR). We carried out a propensity score-matched cohort study which compared six-month PROMs after TKA and UKA in patients enrolled in the NJR for England and Wales, and the English national PROM collection programme. A total of 3519 UKA patients were matched to 10 557 TKAs. . The mean six-month PROMs favoured UKA: the Oxford Knee Score was 37.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) 37.4 to 38.0) for UKA and 36.1 (95% CI 35.9 to 36.3) for TKA; the mean EuroQol EQ-5D index was 0.772 (95% CI 0.764 to 0.780) for UKA and 0.751 (95% CI 0.747 to 0.756) for TKA. UKA patients were more likely to achieve excellent results (odds ratio (OR) 1.59, 95% CI 1.47 to 1.72, p < 0.001) and to be highly satisfied (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.39, p <  0.001), and were less likely to report complications than those who had undergone TKA. . UKA gives better early patient-reported outcomes than TKA; these differences are most marked for the very best outcomes. Complications and readmission are more likely after TKA. Although the data presented reflect the short-term outcome, they suggest that the high revision rate for UKA may not be because of poorer clinical outcomes. These factors should inform decision-making in patients eligible for either procedure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:793–801


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1359 - 1365
1 Oct 2013
Baker PN Rushton S Jameson SS Reed M Gregg P Deehan DJ

Pre-operative variables are increasingly being used to determine eligibility for total knee replacement (TKR). This study was undertaken to evaluate the relationships, interactions and predictive capacity of variables available pre- and post-operatively on patient satisfaction following TKR. Using nationally collected patient reported outcome measures and data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales, we identified 22 798 patients who underwent TKR for osteoarthritis between August 2008 and September 2010. The ability of specific covariates to predict satisfaction was assessed using ordinal logistic regression and structural equational modelling. Only 4959 (22%) of 22 278 patients rated the results of their TKR as ‘excellent’, despite the majority (71%, n = 15 882) perceiving their knee symptoms to be much improved. The strongest predictors of satisfaction were post-operative variables. Satisfaction was significantly and positively related to the perception of symptom improvement (operative success) and the post-operative EuroQol-5D score. While also significant within the models pre-operative variables were less important and had a minimal influence upon post-operative satisfaction. The most robust predictions of satisfaction occurred only when both pre- and post-operative variables were considered together. These findings question the appropriateness of restricting access to care based on arbitrary pre-operative thresholds as these factors have little bearing on post-operative satisfaction. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1359–65


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 3, Issue 4 | Pages 108 - 116
1 Apr 2014
Cheng K Giebaly D Campbell A Rumley A Lowe G

Objective. Mortality rates reported by the National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) were higher following cemented total knee replacement (TKR) compared with uncemented procedures. The aim of this study is to examine and compare the effects of cemented and uncemented TKR on the activation of selected markers of inflammation, endothelium, and coagulation, and on the activation of selected cytokines involved in the various aspects of the systemic response following surgery. Methods. This was a single centre, prospective, case-control study. Following enrolment, blood samples were taken pre-operatively, and further samples were collected at day one and day seven post-operatively. One patient in the cemented group developed a deep-vein thrombosis confirmed on ultrasonography and was excluded, leaving 19 patients in this cohort (mean age 67.4, (. sd. 10.62)), and one patient in the uncemented group developed a post-operative wound infection and was excluded, leaving 19 patients (mean age 66.5, (. sd. 7.82)). Results. Both groups had a similar response with regards to the levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6) and tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα). CD40 levels rose significantly on the cemented group over day one to day seven compared with that of the uncemented group, which occurred over the first 24 hours. The CD14/42a levels demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the cemented group (p < 0.001 first 24 hours and p = 0.02 between days one and seven). . Conclusions. The uncemented and cemented groups demonstrated significant changes in the various parameters measured at various time points but apart from CD14/42a levels, there was no significant difference in the serum markers of inflammation, coagulation and endothelial dysfunction following cemented TKR. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:108–16


Aims

The tibial component of total knee arthroplasty can either be an all-polyethylene (AP) implant or a metal-backed (MB) implant. This study aims to compare the five-year functional outcomes of AP tibial components to MB components in patients aged over 70 years. Secondary aims are to compare quality of life, implant survivorship, and cost-effectiveness.

Methods

A group of 130 patients who had received an AP tibial component were matched for demographic factors of age, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, sex, and preoperative Knee Society Score (KSS) to create a comparison group of 130 patients who received a MB tibial component. Functional outcome was assessed prospectively by KSS, quality of life by 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12), and range of motion (ROM), and implant survivorships were compared. The SF six-dimension (6D) was used to calculate the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for AP compared to MB tibial components using quality-adjusted life year methodology.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 8 | Pages 621 - 627
22 Aug 2023
Fishley WG Paice S Iqbal H Mowat S Kalson NS Reed M Partington P Petheram TG

Aims

The rate of day-case total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the UK is currently approximately 0.5%. Reducing length of stay allows orthopaedic providers to improve efficiency, increase operative throughput, and tackle the rising demand for joint arthroplasty surgery and the COVID-19-related backlog. Here, we report safe delivery of day-case TKA in an NHS trust via inpatient wards with no additional resources.

Methods

Day-case TKAs, defined as patients discharged on the same calendar day as surgery, were retrospectively reviewed with a minimum follow-up of six months. Analysis of hospital and primary care records was performed to determine readmission and reattendance rates. Telephone interviews were conducted to determine patient satisfaction.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 6 | Pages 582 - 588
1 Jun 2024
Bertram W Howells N White SP Sanderson E Wylde V Lenguerrand E Gooberman-Hill R Bruce J

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence and patterns of neuropathic pain over one year in a cohort of patients with chronic post-surgical pain at three months following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods

Between 2016 and 2019, 363 patients with troublesome pain, defined as a score of ≤ 14 on the Oxford Knee Score pain subscale, three months after TKA from eight UK NHS hospitals, were recruited into the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) clinical trial. Self-reported neuropathic pain and postoperative pain was assessed at three, nine, and 15 months after surgery using the painDETECT and Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaires collected by postal survey.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 3 | Pages 277 - 283
1 Mar 2023
Gausden EB Puri S Chiu Y Figgie MP Sculco TP Westrich G Sculco PK Chalmers BP

Aims

The purpose of this study was to assess mid-term survivorship following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with Optetrak Logic components and identify the most common revision indications at a single institution.

Methods

We identified a retrospective cohort of 7,941 Optetrak primary TKAs performed from January 2010 to December 2018. We reviewed the intraoperative findings of 369 TKAs that required revision TKA from January 2010 to December 2021 and the details of the revision implants used. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survivorship. Cox regression analysis was used to examine the impact of patient variables and year of implantation on survival time.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 5 | Pages 393 - 398
25 May 2023
Roof MA Lygrisse K Shichman I Marwin SE Meftah M Schwarzkopf R

Aims

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised.

Methods

This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups.