Aims

We aimed to evaluate the utility of ⁶⁸Ga-citrate positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in the differentiation of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and aseptic loosening (AL), and compare it with ^99mTc-methylene bisphosphonates (^99mTc-MDP) bone scan.

The December 2023 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Tissue integration and chondroprotective potential of acetabular labral augmentation with autograft tendon: study of a porcine model; The Irish National Orthopaedic Register under cyberattack: what happened, and what were the consequences?; An overview of machine learning in orthopaedic surgery: an educational paper; Beware of the fungus…; New evidence for COVID-19 in patients undergoing joint replacement surgery

Reports of improved functional outcome of Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (mHRA) to Total Hip Replacement needs to be balanced with concerns of metal ion release. By removing cobalt-chrome, cHRA reduces these risks. To the author's knowledge, there is no data available on functional outcomes of cHRA, therefore the aim of the study was to compare the function between cHRA patients and mHRA patients. 24 patients received a unilateral cHRA (H1, Embody) and was compared to 24 age and gender matched patients with a unilateral mHRA (BHR, Smith and Nephew). All patients completed the Oxford Hip Score (OHS)[T2] and underwent gait analysis on an instrumented treadmill before and at a mean of 74wks (+/− 10) for mHRA and 53wks (+/− 2) for cHRA post op. Walking trials started at 4km/h and increased in 0.5km/h increments until a top walking speed (TWS) was achieved. Vertical ground reaction forces (GRF) were recorded along with the symmetry index (SI). Spatiotemporal measures of gait were also recorded. Vertical GRF were captured for the entire normalised stance phase using statistical parametric mapping (SPM; CI = 95%). The gain in OHS was similar: H1 (25-46), BHR(27-47). TWS increased by 19% with H1 (6.02 – 8.0km/hr), and 20% with BHR (6.02 – 7.37km/hr). SPM of the entire gait cycle illustrated the restoration of symmetry in both groups with no difference in GRF across the stance phase between groups at 5km/hr pre-op and post-op. At faster speeds (6.5km/hr), H1 patients had a mid-support GRF slightly closer to normal compared to BHR. Both groups increased step length similar from pre to post op (H1:0.76 – 0.85cm, BHR:0.77-0.86cm). In this study, subjective and objective functional outcome measures suggest that short term functional outcomes of ceramic resurfacing is not inferior to metal resurfacing

The October 2024 Arthroplasty Roundup. 360. looks at: Breaking the mould: female representation in arthroplasty surgery remains low, with elbow leading the way; Post COVID-19: where are we with the 'catch up' in England and Wales?; Prevalence and clinical impact of sarcopenia in patients undergoing total joint replacement: a systematic review and a meta-analysis; Total joint replacement and sleep: the state of the evidence

Aims. To compare complication-related reoperation rates following primary arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) versus secondary arthroplasty for failed open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Patients and Methods. We identified patients aged 50 years and over, who sustained a PHF between 2004 and 2015, from linkable datasets. We used intervention codes to identify patients treated with initial ORIF or arthroplasty, and those treated with ORIF who returned for revision arthroplasty within two years. We used multilevel logistic regression to compare reoperations between groups. Results. We identified 1624 patients who underwent initial arthroplasty for PHF, and 98 patients who underwent secondary arthroplasty following failed ORIF. In total, 72 patients (4.4%) in the primary arthroplasty group had a reoperation within two years following arthroplasty, compared with 19 patients (19.4%) in the revision arthroplasty group. This difference was significantly different (p < 0.001) after covariable adjustment. Conclusion. The number of reoperations following arthroplasty for failed ORIF of PHF is significantly higher compared with primary arthroplasty. This suggests that primary arthroplasty may be a better choice for patients whose prognostic factors suggest a high reoperation rate following ORIF. Prospective clinical studies are required to confirm these findings. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1272–1279

In 1975, Sweden started registering primary knee replacement surgeries based on the personal identity number. Individual-based registrations of primary total hip replacements started in 1992 and for hemiarthroplasties the registration started in 2006. The completeness of these registrations is estimated at 98% during the last 10-year period. The long history and high completeness allow for accurate calculations of population-based prevalence of joint replacement and trends over time. We used all data on primary joint replacements available in the Swedish Arthroplasty Register. The prevalence was calculated using number of alive patients with 1) at least one joint replacement 2) at least one hip replacement 3) at least one knee replacement at the end of each year from 2010 – 2021. Publicly available population numbers were retrieved from Statistics Sweden. We calculated total prevalence and prevalence per age in years. By the end of 2021, 3.2% of the Swedish population had at least one hip or knee replacement. This was an increase from 2.5% in 2010. Among 80-year-old, the prevalence was 17.5% for any joint replacement. For both hip and knee replacement and all ages, the prevalence was higher for women. For knee replacement, the 2021 prevalence peaked at the age of 89 (9,4%) while the prevalence continuously increased with age for hip replacements. A considerable proportion of the Swedish elderly population is living with at least one hip or knee replacement. The prevalence has increased during the last 12-year period for both hips and knees. An increasing prevalence may also affect the incidence of fractures and infections. Knowledge about the prevalence is fundamental for planning future demand for primary and revision hip and knee replacement

Aims. Cementing in arthroplasty for hip fracture is associated with improved postoperative function, but may have an increased risk of early mortality compared to uncemented fixation. Quantifying this mortality risk is important in providing safe patient care. This study investigated the association between cement use in arthroplasty and mortality at 30 days and one year in patients aged 50 years and over with hip fracture. Methods. This retrospective cohort study used linked data from the Australian Hip Fracture Registry and the National Death Index. Descriptive analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves tested the unadjusted association of mortality between cemented and uncemented procedures. Multilevel logistic regression, adjusted for covariates, tested the association between cement use and 30-day mortality following arthroplasty. Given the known institutional variation in preference for cemented fixation, an instrumental variable analysis was also performed to minimize the effect of unknown confounders. Adjusted Cox modelling analyzed the association between cement use and mortality at 30 days and one year following surgery. Results. The 30-day mortality was 6.9% for cemented and 4.9% for uncemented groups (p = 0.003). Cement use was significantly associated with 30-day mortality in the Kaplan-Meier survival curve (p = 0.003). After adjusting for covariates, no significant association between cement use and 30-day mortality was shown in the adjusted multilevel logistic regression (odd rati0 (OR) 1.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9 to 1.5; p = 0.366), or in the instrumental variable analysis (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.0, p=0.524). There was no significant between-group difference in mortality within 30days (hazard ratio (HR) 0.9, 95% CI 0.7to 1.1; p = 0.355) or one year (HR 0.9 95% CI 0.8 to 1.1; p = 0.328) in the Cox modelling. Conclusion. No statistically significant difference in patient mortality with cement use in arthroplasty was demonstrated in this population, once adjusted for covariates. This study concludes that cementing in arthroplasty for hip fracture is a safe means of surgical fixation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(3):198–204

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

Aims. The aim of this study was to estimate time to arthroplasty among patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), and to identify factors at enrolment to first-line intervention that are prognostic for progression to surgery. Methods. In this longitudinal register-based observational study, we identified 72,069 patients with hip and knee OA in the Better Management of Patients with Osteoarthritis Register (BOA), who were referred for first-line OA intervention, between May 2008 and December 2016. Patients were followed until the first primary arthroplasty surgery before 31 December 2016, stratified into a hip and a knee OA cohort. Data were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. Results. At five years, Kaplan-Meier estimates showed that 46% (95% confidence interval (CI) 44.6 to 46.9) of those with hip OA, and 20% (95% CI 19.7 to 21.0) of those with knee OA, had progressed to arthroplasty. The strongest prognostic factors were desire for surgery (hazard ratio (HR) hip 3.12 (95% CI 2.95 to 3.31), HR knee 2.72 (95% CI 2.55 to 2.90)), walking difficulties (HR hip 2.20 (95% CI 1.97 to 2.46), HR knee 1.95 (95% CI 1.73 to 2.20)), and frequent pain (HR hip 1.56 (95% CI 1.40 to 1.73), HR knee 1.77 (95% CI 1.58 to 2.00)). In hip OA, the probability of progression to surgery was lower among those with comorbidities (e.g. ≥ four conditions; HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.69)), with no detectable effects in the knee OA cohort. Instead, being overweight or obese increased the probability of OA progress in the knee cohort (HR 1.25 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.37)), but not among those with hip OA. Conclusion. Patients with hip OA progressed faster and to a greater extent to arthroplasty than patients with knee OA. Progression was strongly influenced by patients’ desire for surgery and by factors related to severity of OA symptoms, but factors not directly related to OA symptoms are also of importance. However, a large proportion of patients with OA do not seem to require surgery within five years, especially among those with knee OA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):792–800

The development and implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are of particular interest in elective orthopaedics due to clinical benefits and cost effectiveness. The Wycombe Arthroplasty Rapid-Recovery Pathway (WARP) was designed to streamline hip and knee joint arthroplasty to reduce time spent in hospital whilst optimising outcomes in an NHS District General Hospital. 966 patients were admitted to Wycombe General Hospital for primary elective joint replacement (60 UKR, 446 THR, 460 TKR) during the period 1st September 2020 to 31st September 2022. The WARP pathway was used for 357 (37%) patients (32 UKR, 155 THR, 170 TKR) and the standard “non-WARP” pathway was used for 609 (63%) patients (28 UKR 291 THR, 290 TKR). Data was collected on length of stay, time of mobilisation, number of physiotherapy sessions, and inpatient morbidity. Average length of stay following UKR was 0.75 days for WARP vs 2.96 for non-WARP patients, following THR was 2.17 days for WARP vs 4.17 for non-WARP patients, following TKR was 3.4 days for WARP vs 3.92 for non-WARP patients. Day-0 mobilisation after UKR was achieved in 97% of WARP vs 12% of non-WARP patients, after THR in 43% of WARP vs 14% of non-WARP patients, after TKR in 33% of WARP vs 11% of non-WARP patients. Same-day discharge was achieved in the WARP cohort in 63% of UKR, 10% of THR, 2% of TKR patients. There were no same-day discharges in the non-WARP cohort. Complications delaying mobilisation (pain, nausea/vomiting, dizziness/low BP) were identified in 8.4% of WARP vs 25% of non-WARP patients. Our cohort study shows that the initiation of WARP Rapid Recovery pathway for joint arthroplasty decreased the average length of stay after UKR by 2.21 days, after THR by 2 days, after TKR by 0.52 days. Time to first mobilisation was decreased significantly by increased rates of same-day mobilisation and reduced rates of postoperative anaesthetic-related complications

Introduction: We undertook an audit study to find out patient perception of being seen by a nurse practitioner in the clinic for a follow up appointment instead of a consultant and satisfaction with the joint clinic. Methods and materials: 100 patients were surveyed following their post-operation review with the nurse. Data was collected prospectively over a period of 6 months. Patients were asked to complete the questionnaire on the day of their appointment and to hand the survey prior to leaving. Hence we had 100% response rate. Results: Majority of the respondents were female (61%) with 50 % having had total hip replacements and the rest had knee replacements. 99% of respondents (94/95) felt that enough time was spent with them during the appointment. All respondents (100%) reported that they were able to ask questions and were answered satisfactorily. The consultant saw 26% of respondents; further 6% was seen by a registrar and the rest 68% were seen by the nurse specialist. Reasons for being seen by a doctor included check up or assessment, reviewing stitches and infection. 42% of respondents (33/79) were referred for further treatment either by the consultant (33%), nurse (64%) or registrar (3%). Reasons for further treatment included physiotherapy, plaster room, and further follow up (check up) appointment at 3–6 months to review the patient following surgery. 100% of respondents (97/97) were satisfied with the combined consultant/nurse clinic. 3 did not record their response. The vast majority of respondents (80%, 79/99) reported that they ‘don’t mind’ who they would have been seen by in the clinic. Discussion: The results indicate that patients are satisfied with the current clinic arrangements i.e. nurse-led clinic with the consultant being available. Hence there is a definite role for nurse led clinics for joint replacement surgery follow-ups

This annotation reviews current concepts on the three most common surgical approaches used for proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty: dorsal, volar, and lateral. Advantages and disadvantages of each are highlighted, and the outcomes are discussed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1329–1333

Introduction. Circular external frames (CEF) are commonly used for a wide variety of indications, often when other devices are not appropriate. Circular frames are particularly associated with pin-site infection (PSI). Currently there is a gap in the available literature surrounding the risk of frame use with in-situ prosthetic joints. This retrospective study investigated the incidence of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in a series of patients with in-situ arthroplasties treated with CEF. Materials & Methods. From a departmental database of 1052 frames performed from March 2007-March 2023, the outcomes of 34 patients (40 frames) with in-situ arthroplasties at the time of CEF were reviewed (mean follow-up 70 months). Patient identification was by review of all local and regional imaging. The primary outcome was development of PJI during or following CEF and subsequent need for surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were development of superficial pin site or deep bone infection (without PJI). Results. Of 40 frames used to treat 34 patients, no PJIs were detected. Average patient age was 67 (range 55–82). 22 had cardio-respiratory disease, 11 diabetes, 15 smoked and 8 were immunosuppressed. 53 arthroplasties were in situ at the time of treatment, 12 involving the same bone as the frame. Average time in frame was 253 days. 23 patients developed PSI, 2 required a further procedure for persistent deep bone infection not involving the arthroplasties. Conclusions. Although this study involves a relatively low numbers of patients, our results are reassuring that circular frame management in patients with in-situ arthroplasty does not represent an unacceptable risk of PJI. We hope to promote these findings and encourage multi-centre collaboration to expand on the available evidence to better answer this important yet under-reported clinical question

Aims. The proximal tibia (PT) is the anatomical site most frequently affected by primary bone tumours after the distal femur. Reconstruction of the PT remains challenging because of the poor soft-tissue cover and the need to reconstruct the extensor mechanism. Reconstructive techniques include implantation of massive endoprosthesis (megaprosthesis), osteoarticular allografts (OAs), or allograft-prosthesis composites (APCs). Methods. This was a retrospective analysis of clinical data relating to patients who underwent proximal tibial arthroplasty in our regional bone tumour centre from 2010 to 2018. Results. A total of 76 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Mean age at surgery was 43.2 years (12 to 86 (SD 21)). The mean follow-up period was 60.1 months (5.4 to 353). In total 21 failures were identified, giving an overall failure rate of 27.6%. Prosthesis survival at five years was 75.5%, and at ten years was 59%. At last follow-up, mean knee flexion was 89.8° (SD 36°) with a mean extensor lag of 18.1° (SD 24°). In univariate analysis, factors associated with better survival of the prosthesis were a malignant or metastatic cancer diagnosis (versus benign), with a five- and ten-year survival of 78.9% and 65.7% versus 37.5% (p = 0.045), while in-hospital length of stay longer than nine days was also associated with better prognosis with five- and ten-year survival rates at 84% and 84% versus 60% and 16% (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, only in-hospital length of stay was associated with longer survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.66). Conclusion. We have shown that proximal tibial arthroplasty with endoprosthesis is a safe and reliable method for reconstruction in patients treated for orthopaedic oncological conditions. Either modular or custom implants in this series performed well. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(9):733–740

We aim to explore the potential technologies for monitoring and assessment of patients undergoing arthroplasty by examining selected literature focusing on the technology currently available and reflecting on possible future development and application. The reviewed literature indicates a large variety of different hardware and software, widely available and used in a limited manner, to assess patients’ performance. There are extensive opportunities to enhance and integrate the systems which are already in existence to develop patient-specific pathways for rehabilitation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(10):1104–1109

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the commonest and most successful orthopaedic procedures used for the management of end-stage arthritis. With the recent introduction of robotic-assisted joint replacement, Computed tomography (CT) has become part of required pre-operative planning. The aim of this study is to quantify and characterise incidental CT findings, their clinical significance, and their effect on the planned joint arthroplasty. All consecutive patients undergoing an elective TJA (total joint arthroplasty; hip or knee) were retrospectively identified, over a 4-year period (December 2019 and November 2023). Data documented and analysed included patient demographics, type of joint arthroplasty, CT findings, their clinical significance, as well as potential delays to the planned arthroplasty because of these findings and subsequent further investigation. A total of 987 patients (female: 514 patients (52.1%)) undergoing TJA were identified (THA: 444 patients (45.0%); TKA: 400 patients (40.5%); UKA: 143 patients (14.5%)). Incidental findings within imaged areas were identified in 227 patients (23.0%). Of these findings, 74 (7.5%) were significant, requiring further investigation or management, 40 (4.1%) of which represented potential malignancy and 4 (0.4%) resulting in a new cancer diagnosis. A single patient was found to have an aneurysm requiring urgent vascular intervention. Surgery was delayed for further investigation in 4 patients (0.4%). Significant findings were more frequent in THA patients (THA: 43 (9.7%) TKA/UKA: 31 (5.7%). Within our cohort, 74 (7.5%) patients had significant incidental findings that required further investigations or management, with 4 (0.4%) having a previously undiagnosed malignancy. We strongly advocate that all robotic arthroplasty planning CTs are reviewed and reported by a specialist, to avoid missing undiagnosed malignancies and other significant diagnoses

Total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA) are largely successful procedures; however, both have variable outcomes, resulting in some patients being dissatisfied with the outcome. Surgeons are turning to technologies such as robotic-assisted surgery in an attempt to improve outcomes. Robust studies are needed to find out if these innovations are really benefitting patients. The Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and Cost Effectiveness Randomised Controlled Trials (RACER) trials are multicentre, patient-blinded randomized controlled trials. The patients have primary osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. The operation is Mako-assisted THA or TKA and the control groups have operations using conventional instruments. The primary clinical outcome is the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months, and there is a built-in analysis of cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes include early pain, the alignment of the components, and medium- to long-term outcomes. This annotation outlines the need to assess these technologies and discusses the design and challenges when conducting such trials, including surgical workflows, isolating the effect of the operation, blinding, and assessing the learning curve. Finally, the future of robotic surgery is discussed, including the need to contemporaneously introduce and evaluate such technologies. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):114–120

Pacific people in New Zealand experience significant disparity in health outcomes. There is little known about the burden of arthritis within this community or difficulties accessing specialist orthopaedic care. This qualitative study evaluated the experiences of Pacific patients who underwent hip or knee arthroplasty with a goal to identify barriers to accessing arthroplasty for this community. We interviewed Pacific patients within the Bay of Plenty region who had received either elective hip or knee arthroplasty between 2013 and 2022. Interviews were centred on perceptions of arthritis severity, duration of symptoms, primary care and specialist interactions. Patients were encouraged to offer feedback on ways to improve this experience. We identified 6087 publicly funded primary joints performed in Tauranga hospital and 58 patients were of Pacific ethnicity. After exclusion criteria was applied, we successfully interviewed 20 patients eligible for our study. Pacific patients represented 2.9% of the of the BOP catchment but only received 0.43% of the publicly funded joints. Most reported reluctance to seek help from primary care until symptoms were present for at least a year. Most commonly cited reasons for not seeking help were fear of hospital services and lack of awareness in the community about osteoarthritis. We identified a lack of community awareness of osteoarthritis and arthroplasty among Pacific. This may result in delayed presentation to primary care and decreased utilisation of publicly funded joint surgery. It is reassuring that most patients of Pacific ethnicity who receive primary hip or knee arthroplasty report a positive experience. Public health initiatives together with positive feedback from Pacific patients who have undergone surgery will help to increase awareness of arthroplasty as an option to restore function and relieve pain