This study aims to determine the lifetime risk of revision surgery after primary knee arthroplasty (KA). The Scottish Arthroplasty Project dataset was utilised to identify all patients undergoing primary KA during the period 1998–2019. The cumulative incidence function for revision and death was calculated and adjusted analyses utilised cause-specific Cox regression modelling to determine the influence of patient-factors. The lifetime risk was calculated for patients aged between 45–99 years using multiple decrement lifetable methodology. The lifetime risk of revision ranged between 32.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 22.62–47.31) for patients aged 45–49 years and 0.63% (95%CI 0.1–4.5) for patients aged over 90 years. Adjusted analyses demonstrated the converse effect of age on revision (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.5, 95%CI 0.5–0.6) and death (HR 3.5, 95%CI 3.4–3.7). Male sex was associated with increased risks of revision (HR 1.1, 95%CI 1.1–1.2) and death (HR 1.4, 95%CI 1.3–1.4). Patients with inflammatory arthropathy had a higher risk of death (HR 1.7, 95%CI 1.7–1.8), but were less likely to be revised (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.74–0.98) than those treated for osteoarthritis. Patients with greater number of comorbidities and greater levels of socio-economic deprivation were at increased risk of death, but neither increased the risk of revision. The lifetime risk of
The aim of this study was to describe services available to patients with periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF) in England and Wales, with focus on variation between centres and areas for care improvement. This work used data freely available from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) facilities survey in 2021, which asked 21 questions about the care of patients with PPFFs, and nine relating to clinical decision-making around a hypothetical case.Aims
Methods
Introduction. There has been renewed interest in the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with reports of good long term outcomes. Advantages over a more extensive knee replacement include: preservation of bone stock, retention of both cruciate ligaments, preservation of other compartments and better knee kinematics. However, a number of authors have commented on the problem of osseous defects requiring technically difficult revision surgery. Furthermore, a number of recent national register studies have shown inferior survivorship when compared to total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to review the cases of our patients who had a revision total knee arthroplasty for failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. To determine the reason for failure, describe the technical difficulties during revision surgery and record the clinical outcomes of the revision arthroplasties. Methods. Between 2003 and 2009 our institute performed thirty three revisions of a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty on thirty two patients. The time to revision surgery ranged from 2 months to 159 months with a median of 19 months. Details of the operations and complications were taken form case notes. Patient assessment included range of motion, need for walking aids and the functional status of the affected knee in the form of the Oxford knee score questionnaire. Results. The reasons for failure were aseptic loosening of tibial component, persistent pain, dislocated meniscus, mal-alignment and osteoarthritis in another compartment. Of the 33
Paget's disease of bone (PDB) is the second most common metabolic bone disease. Osteoarthritis (OA) affects one-third of patients with PDB. The incidence of THR (total hip replacement) and TKR (total knee replacement) is 3.1- and 1.7-fold higher in PDB patients compared to non-affected age-matched controls. No large studies or joint registry reports exist describing the outcomes following THR or TKR in patients with PDB. The objectives of this study were to investigate the outcomes following THR and TKR in patients with PDB using national joint registry data. 144 THR and 43 TKR were identified using the Scottish Arthroplasty Project from 1996–2013. For THR, the most common early post-operative surgical complications were haematoma formation (1.4%), and surgical site infection (1.4%). The absolute incidence during follow-up of dislocation was 2.8%, and revision hip arthroplasty was performed in 2.8% of cases. Implant survival of the primary prosthesis was 96.3% (CI: 92.8 – 99.8) at 10-years, and patient survival was 50.0% (39.6 – 60.4) at 10-years. For TKR, the most common early post-operative surgical complication was surgical site infection (2.3%). The absolute incidence during follow-up of
Introduction. Revision type arthroplasties for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis is an effective and secure procedure. It has different indications, but the most relevant is the revision of a failured primary arthroplasty. In our study, we reviewed the results of another indication, the implantation of a revision type arthroplasty as a primary procedure in cases of severe deformities. Objectives. To assess the radiological, clinical and functional situation and the quality of life of those patients in whom a
Introduction. In contrast to knee arthroplasty, there is no national register on high tibial osteotomy (HTO) in Sweden. The knowledge of the outcome of HTO as a treatment alternative for knee osteoarthritis (OA) is insufficient. The rate of
Introduction. Unicompartmental arthroplasty is still a controversial issue in knee replacement, mainly due to a marked variation in published survival rates of the implants. The aim of this study was to analyse possible risk factors for revision following Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (OUKA). Material and methods. Since 1997 data for all patients with primary and