This cohort study investigated the influence of psychological factors, including perception of illness, anxiety and depression on recovery and functional outcome after total knee replacement surgery.

A total of 100 patients (55 male; 45 female) with a mean age of 71 (42 to 92) who underwent a primary total knee replacement for osteoarthritis were recruited into this study. In all 97 participants completed the six week and 87 the one year follow-up questionnaires.

Pre-operatively patients completed the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Recovery Locus of Control Scale. Function was assessed pre-operatively, at six weeks and one year using Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the goniometer-measured range of movement (ROM).

The results showed that pre-operative function had the biggest impact on post-operative outcome for ROM and OKS. In addition questionnaire variables and depression had an impact on the OKS at six weeks. Depression and anxiety were also associated with a higher (worse) knee score at one year but did not influence the ROM at either six weeks or one year.

Recovery from total knee replacement can be difficult to predict. This study has identified psychological factors that play an important role in recovery from surgery and functional outcome. These should be taken into account when considering patients for total knee replacement.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:210–16.

The popularity of cementless total hip replacement (THR) has surpassed cemented THR in England and Wales. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cementless THR with the most common combination (accounting for almost a third of all cementless THRs), and explores risk factors independently associated with failure, using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Patients with osteoarthritis who had a DePuy Corail/Pinnacle THR implanted between the establishment of the registry in 2003 and 31 December 2010 were included within analyses. There were 35 386 procedures. Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which the risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates. The overall rate of revision at five years was 2.4% (99% confidence interval 2.02 to 2.79). In the final adjusted model, we found that the risk of revision was significantly higher in patients receiving metal-on-metal (MoM: hazard ratio (HR) 1.93, p < 0.001) and ceramic-on-ceramic bearings (CoC: HR 1.55, p = 0.003) compared with the best performing bearing (metal-on-polyethylene). The risk of revision was also greater for smaller femoral stems (sizes 8 to 10: HR 1.82, p < 0.001) compared with mid-range sizes. In a secondary analysis of only patients where body mass index (BMI) data were available (n = 17 166), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² significantly increased the risk of revision (HR 1.55, p = 0.002). The influence of the bearing on the risk of revision remained significant (MoM: HR 2.19, p < 0.001; CoC: HR 2.09, p = 0.001). The risk of revision was independent of age, gender, head size and offset, shell, liner and stem type, and surgeon characteristics.

We found significant differences in failure between bearing surfaces and femoral stem size after adjustment for a range of covariates in a large cohort of single-brand cementless THRs. In this study of procedures performed since 2003, hard bearings had significantly higher rates of revision, but we found no evidence that head size had an effect. Patient characteristics, such as BMI and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, also influence the survival of cementless components.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:747–57.

Current analysis of unicondylar knee replacements (UKRs) by national registries is based on the pooled results of medial and lateral implants. Consequently, little is known about the differential performance of medial and lateral replacements and the influence of each implant type within these pooled analyses. Using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) we aimed to determine the proportion of UKRs implanted on the lateral side of the knee, and their survival and reason for failure compared with medial UKRs. By combining information on the side of operation with component details held on the NJR, we were able to determine implant laterality (medial versus lateral) for 32 847 of the 35 624 unicondylar replacements (92%) registered before December 2010. Of these, 2052 (6%) were inserted on the lateral side of the knee. The rates of survival at five years were 93.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 92.7 to 93.5) for medial and 93.0% (95% CI 91.1 to 94.9) for lateral UKRs (p = 0.49). The rates of failure remained equivalent after adjusting for patient age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, indication for surgery and implant design using Cox’s proportional hazards method (hazard ratio for lateral relative to medial replacement = 0.88 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.13); p = 0.32). Aseptic loosening/lysis and unexplained pain were the main reasons for revision in both groups, although the reasons did vary depending on whether a mobile- or a fixed-bearing design was used. At a maximum of eight years the mid-term survival rates of medial and lateral UKRs are similar.

Despite excellent results, the use of cemented total hip replacement (THR) is declining. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR using the most common combination of components that accounted for almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with osteoarthritis who had an Exeter V40/Contemporary THR (Stryker) implanted before 31 December 2010 and recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales were included in the analysis. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance threshold of p < 0.01. A total of 34 721 THRs were included in the study. The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12). In the final adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, p < 0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head sizes (< 28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50, p = 0.005). The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69 to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component. The overall risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material (stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset. However, the risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a ‘plus’ offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component (HR 2.34, p < 0.001).

In summary, we found that there were significant differences in failure between different designs of acetabular component and sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to assess functional outcome and patient satisfaction. They provide a framework for comparisons between surgical units, and individual surgeons for benchmarking and financial remuneration. Better performance may bring the reward of more customers as patients and commissioners seek out high performers for their elective procedures. Using National Joint Registry (NJR) data linked to PROMs we identified 22 691 primary total knee replacements (TKRs) undertaken for osteoarthritis in England and Wales between August 2008 and February 2011, and identified the surgical factors that influenced the improvements in the Oxford knee score (OKS) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) assessment using multiple regression analysis. After correction for patient factors the only surgical factors that influenced PROMs were implant brand and hospital type (both p < 0.001). However, the effects of surgical factors upon the PROMs were modest compared with patient factors. For both the OKS and the EQ-5D the most important factors influencing the improvement in PROMs were the corresponding pre-operative score and the patient’s general health status. Despite having only a small effect on PROMs, this study has shown that both implant brand and hospital type do influence reported subjective functional scores following TKR. In the current climate of financial austerity, proposed performance-based remuneration and wider patient choice, it would seem unwise to ignore these effects and the influence of a range of additional patient factors.

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.

Following arthroplasty of the knee, the patient’s perception of improvement in symptoms is fundamental to the assessment of outcome. Better clinical outcome may offset the inferior survival observed for some types of implant. By examining linked National Joint Registry (NJR) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data, we aimed to compare PROMs collected at a minimum of six months post-operatively for total (TKR: n = 23 393) and unicondylar knee replacements (UKR: n = 505). Improvements in knee-specific (Oxford knee score, OKS) and generic (EuroQol, EQ-5D) scores were compared and adjusted for case-mix differences using multiple regression. Whereas the improvements in the OKS and EQ-5D were significantly greater for TKR than for UKR, once adjustments were made for case-mix differences and pre-operative score, the improvements in the two scores were not significantly different. The adjusted mean differences in the improvement of OKS and EQ-5D were 0.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.9 to 0.9; p = 0.96) and 0.009 (95% CI -0.034 to 0.015; p = 0.37), respectively.

We found no difference in the improvement of either knee-specific or general health outcomes between TKR and UKR in a large cohort of registry patients. With concerns about significantly higher revision rates for UKR observed in worldwide registries, we question the widespread use of an arthroplasty that does not confer a significant benefit in clinical outcome.

We compared thromboembolic events, major haemorrhage and death after knee replacement in patients receiving either aspirin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales were linked to an administrative database of hospital admissions in the English National Health Service. A total of 156 798 patients between April 2003 and September 2008 were included and followed for 90 days. Multivariable risk modelling was used to estimate odds ratios adjusted for baseline risk factors (AOR). An AOR < 1 indicates that risk rates are lower with LMWH than with aspirin. In all, 36 159 patients (23.1%) were prescribed aspirin and 120 639 patients (76.9%) were prescribed LMWH. We found no statistically significant differences between the aspirin and LMWH groups in the rate of pulmonary embolism (0.49% vs 0.45%, AOR 0.88 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.05); p = 0.16), 90-day mortality (0.39% vs 0.45%, AOR 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.37); p = 0.19) or major haemorrhage (0.37% vs 0.39%, AOR 1.01 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.22); p = 0.94). There was a significantly greater likelihood of needing to return to theatre in the aspirin group (0.26% vs 0.19%, AOR 0.73 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.94); p = 0.01). Between patients receiving LMWH or aspirin there was only a small difference in the risk of pulmonary embolism, 90-day mortality and major haemorrhage.

These results should be considered when the existing guidelines for thromboprophylaxis after knee replacement are reviewed.

We compared thromboembolic events, major haemorrhage and death after total hip replacement in patients receiving either aspirin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). We analysed data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales linked to an administrative database of hospital admissions in the English National Health Service. A total of 108 584 patients operated on between April 2003 and September 2008 were included and followed up for 90 days. Multivariable risk modelling and propensity score matching were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) adjusted for baseline risk factors. An OR <  1 indicates that rates are lower with LMWH than with aspirin. In all, 21.1% of patients were prescribed aspirin and 78.9% LMWH. Without adjustment, we found no statistically significant differences. The rate of pulmonary embolism was 0.68% in both groups and 90-day mortality was 0.65% with aspirin and 0.61% with LMWH (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11). With risk adjustment, the difference in mortality increased (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01). With propensity score matching the mortality difference increased even further to 0.65% with aspirin and 0.51% with LMWH (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.98). These results should be considered when the conflicting recommendations of existing guidelines for thromboprophylaxis after hip replacement are being addressed.

Correct positioning and alignment of components during primary total knee replacement (TKR) is widely accepted to be an important predictor of patient satisfaction and implant durability. This retrospective study reports the effect of the post-operative mechanical axis of the lower limb in the coronal plane on implant survival following primary TKR.

A total of 501 TKRs in 396 patients were divided into an aligned group with a neutral mechanical axis (± 3°) and a malaligned group where the mechanical axis deviated from neutral by > 3°. At 15 years’ follow-up, 33 of 458 (7.2%) TKRs were revised for aseptic loosening. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a weak tendency towards improved survival with restoration of a neutral mechanical axis, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.47).

We found that the relationship between survival of a primary TKR and mechanical axis alignment is weaker than that described in a number of previous reports.

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate how psychological factors and illness perception can influence the recovery and functional outcome after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Patients and Methods: 100 patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty were included in this study. Pre-operatively patients were asked to complete a psychological questionnaire consisting of the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-r), Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS) and Recovery Locus of Control scale (RLOC). Function was assessed using Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and range of motion (ROM) pre-operatively and at six weeks and one year after surgery.

Results: Early results show that individual phychological variables correlate with the post-operative OKS at six weeks. Beliefs that the condition has a major effect on life and less understanding of the illness are associated with a poorer recovery. Women were found to have a higher degree of personal control, but this was not correlated with functional outcome. Patients with higher pre-operative OKS were more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression.

None of the investigated parameters predicted ROM at six weeks.

Discussion: Recovery from TKA surgery can be difficult to predict. This study showed that several psychological variables influence early functional outcome. These should be taken into account when considering patients for TKA surgery. Improving patient education, looking at home environment and social network as well as adressing anxiety and depression may help to improve overall outcome after TKA surgery.

Purpose: To compare the survivorship, at 15 years, of cemented versus cementless fixation of press-fit condylar primary total knee replacements.

Methods: A prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fixation. All operations were performed either by, or under the direct supervision of, a single surgeon (PJG). Patients were followed up to establish the rate of implant survival. No patients were lost to follow up. Revision was defined as further surgery, irrespective of indication, that involved replacement of any of the three original components. Life table analysis was used to assess survival. Cox’s proportional hazards regression analysis was used to compare the cumulative survival rates for the two groups.

Results: Altogether 44 patients underwent revision surgery (24 cemented vs. 20 cementless). 11 cases were revised secondary to infection, 26 were revised due to aseptic loosening and 7 cases were revised for other reasons (instability, anterior knee pain, polyethylene wear, patellar malallignment). At time of analysis a further 7 had revision planned.

For cemented knees 15-year survival=80.7% (95%CI, 71.5–87.4), 10-year survival=91.7 (95%CI, 87.1–94.8). For cementless knees 15-year survival=75.3% (95% CI, 63.5–84.3), 10-year survival=93.3% (95%CI, 88.4–96.2). There was no difference between these two groups.

When comparing the covariates (operation, sex, age, diagnosis, side), there was no significant difference between operation type (Hazard ratio=0.83 (95%CI, 0.45–1.52) p=0.545), side of operation (HR=0.58 (95%CI, 0.32–1.05) p=0.072), age (HR=0.97 (95%CI, 0.93–1.01) p=0.097), diagnosis (OA vs. non OA, (HR=1.25 (95%CI,0.38–4.12) p=0.718). However, there was a significant gender difference (Males vs. Females (HR=2.48 (95%CI, 1.34–4.61) p=0.004).

The worst case scenario was calculated to include those patients that have also been listed for revision. Cemented 15-yr survival = 78.3%, (95%CI, 68.9–85.4), cementless 15-yr survival = 72.0%, (95%CI, 59.9–81.5).

Conclusion: This single surgeon series, with no loss to follow up, provides reliable data of the revision rates of the most commonly used total knee replacement. The survival of the press-fit condylar total knee replacement remains good at 15 years irrespective of the method of fixation. This information is useful for strategic health authorities when establishing future requirements for revision knee surgery.

Purpose: To examine how patients viewed the outcome of their joint replacement at least one year post surgery. Emphasis was placed on investigating the relative influence of ongoing pain and functional limitation on patient satisfaction.

Method: Questionnaire based assessment of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), patient satisfaction, and need for reoperation in a group of 10,000 patients who had undergone primary unilateral knee replacement between April and December 2003. Questionnaires were linked to the NJR database to provide data on background demographics, clinical parameters and intraoperative surgical information for each patient.

Data was analysed to investigate the relationship between the OKS, satisfaction rate and the background factors. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to establish which factors influenced patient satisfaction.

Results: 87.4% patients returned questionnaires. Overall 81.8% indicated they were satisfied with their knee replacement, with 7.0% unsatisfied and 11.2% unsure. The mean OKS varied dependent upon patients’ satisfaction (satisfied=22.04 (S.D 7.87), unsatisfied=41.70 (S.D 8.32), unsure=35.17 (S.D 8.24)). These differences were statistically significant (p< 0.001).

Regression modelling showed that patients with higher scores relating to the pain and function elements of the OKS had lower levels of satisfaction (p< 0.001) and that ongoing pain was a stronger predictor of lower levels of satisfaction. Other predictors of lower levels of satisfaction included female gender (p< 0.05), a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis (p=0.02) and unicondylar replacement (p=0.002). Differences in satisfaction rate were also observed dependent upon age and ASA grade

609 patients (7.4%) had undergone further surgery and 1476 patients (17.9%) indicated another procedure was planned. Both the OKS and satisfaction rates were significantly better in patients who had not suffered complications.

Conclusion: This study highlights a number of clinically important factors that influence patient satisfaction following knee replacement. This information could be used when planning surgery to counsel patients and help form realistic expectations of the anticipated postoperative result.

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in patients who undergo hip and knee arthroplasty tends to be associated with NSAID use, steroid intake, pre-existing peptic ulcers and smoking. The use of Aspirin for thromboprophylaxis is an added risk for the occurrence of GI Bleed. The aim of this study was to determine if the use of peri-operative oral Ranitidine reduces the incidence of GI bleeding when Aspirin thromboprophylaxis is used for hip and knee arthroplasty.

Data from 1491 consecutive patients who underwent Hip and knee replacements at the James cook university hospital (Group 1) and 886 patients who underwent Hip and Knee replacements at the Friarage hospital, Northallerton (Group 2) was analysed to determine the incidence of Gastro intestinal Bleeding. All patients received 150 mg of Aspirin per day for a period of six weeks from the day of surgery. Additionally patients operated at the Friarage Hospital received 300 mg of oral Ranitidine per day, for three postoperative days. Patients with clinically symptomatic GI bleeding were evaluated by the Upper GI team.

We observed that patients in Group 1 had a higher incidence of overt upper GI haemorrhage (n=14), which was statistically significant (p < 0.014) compared with patients in group 2(n=1). From the pooled data of both groups, there were 18 reported patients with symptomatic pulmonary embolism (0.75%) 3 of which were fatal (0.12%), phlebitis of deep leg veins in 31 patients (1.3%), deep vein thrombosis in 34 patients (1.43%), 5 of whom had embolic episodes, post operative infection in 22 patients (1.13%), and postoperative haemorrhage in 5 patients (0.2%). Thromboembolic phenomenon and pulmonary embolism was confirmed by autopsy in the three cases.

Based on this experience, we recommend the use of peri-operative gastric protection when aspirin is used for thromboprophylaxis in hip and knee arthroplasty.

We report the long-term survival of a prospective randomised consecutive series of 501 primary knee replacements using the press-fit condylar posterior cruciate ligament-retaining prosthesis. Patients received either cemented (219 patients, 277 implants) or cementless (177 patients, 224 implants) fixation. Altogether, 44 of 501 knees (8.8%) underwent revision surgery (24 cemented vs 20 cementless). For cemented knees the 15-year survival rate was 80.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71.5 to 87.4) and for cementless knees it was 75.3% (95% CI 63.5 to 84.3). There was no significant difference between the two groups (cemented vs cementless; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.52, p = 0.55). When comparing the covariates there was no significant difference in the rates of survival between the side of operation (HR 0.58, p = 0.07), age (HR 0.97, p = 0.10) and diagnosis (HR 1.25 p = 0.72). However, there was a significant gender difference, with males having a higher failure rate with cemented fixation (HR 2.48, p = 0.004). Females had a similar failure rate in both groups.

This single-surgeon series, with no loss to follow-up, provides reliable data of the revision rates of one of the most commonly-used total knee replacements. The survival of the press-fit condylar total knee replacement remained good at 15 years, irrespective of the method of fixation.

A postal questionnaire was sent to 10 000 patients more than one year after their total knee replacement (TKR). They were assessed using the Oxford knee score and were asked whether they were satisfied, unsure or unsatisfied with their TKR. The response rate was 87.4% (8231 of 9417 eligible questionnaires) and a total of 81.8% (6625 of 8095) of patients were satisfied. Multivariable regression modelling showed that patients with higher scores relating to the pain and function elements of the Oxford knee score had a lower level of satisfaction (p < 0.001), and that ongoing pain was a stronger predictor of this. Female gender and a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis were found to be predictors of lower levels of patient satisfaction. Differences in the rate of satisfaction were also observed in relation to age, the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade and the type of prosthesis.

This study has provided data on the Oxford knee score and the expected levels of satisfaction at one year after TKR. The results should act as a benchmark of practice in the United Kingdom and provide a baseline for peer comparison between institutions.

The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design, PFC-∑ total knee replacement for up to 24 months. There were 51 patients who were randomised into two treatment groups. There were 10 subsequent withdrawals, leaving 21 all-polyethylene and 20 metal-backed tibial implants. No patient was lost to follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the groups. At two years one metal-backed implant showed migration > 1 mm, but no polyethylene implant reached this level. There was a significant increase in the SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after operation in both groups.

In an uncomplicated primary total knee replacement the all-polyethylene PFC-∑ tibial prosthesis showed no statistical difference in migration from that of the metal-backed counterpart. There was no difference in the clinical results as assessed by the SF-12, the Oxford knee score, alignment or range of movement at 24 months, although these assessment measures were not statistically powered in this study.

Using the Trent regional arthroplasty register, we analysed the survival at ten years of 1198 consecutive Charnley total hip replacements carried out across a single health region of the United Kingdom in 1990. At ten years, information regarding outcome was available for 1001 hips (83.6%). The crude revision rate was 6.2% (62 of 1001) and the cumulative survival rate with revision of the components as an end-point was 93.1%. At five years, a review of this series of patients identified gross radiological failure in 25 total hip replacements which had previously been unrecognised. At ten years the outcome was known for 18 of these 25 patients (72%), of whom 13 had not undergone revision.

This is the first study to assess the survival at ten years for the primary Charnley total hip replacement performed in a broad cross-section of hospitals in the United Kingdom, as opposed to specialist centres. Our results highlight the importance of the arthroplasty register in identifying the long-term outcome of hip prostheses.

New brands of joint prosthesis are released for general implantation with limited evidence of their long-term performance in patients. The CUSUM continuous monitoring method is a statistical testing procedure which could be used to provide prospective evaluation of brands as soon as implantation in patients begins and give early warning of poor performance. We describe the CUSUM and illustrate the potential value of this monitoring tool by applying it retrospectively to the 3M Capital Hip experience.

The results show that if the clinical data and methodology had been available, the CUSUM would have given an alert to the underperformance of this prosthesis almost four years before the issue of a Hazard Notice by the Medical Devices Agency. This indicates that the CUSUM can be a valuable tool in monitoring joint prostheses, subject to timely and complete collection of data. Regional or national joint registries provide an opportunity for future centralised, continuous monitoring of all hip and knee prostheses using these techniques.

The Department of Health and the Public Health Laboratory Service established the Nosocomial Infection National Surveillance Scheme in order to standardise the collection of information about infections acquired in hospital in the United Kingdom and provide national data with which hospitals could measure their own performance. The definition of superficial incisional infection (skin and subcutaneous tissue), set by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), should meet at least one of the defined criteria which would confirm the diagnosis and determine the need for specific treatment.

We have assessed the interobserver reliability of the criteria for superficial incisional infection set by the CDC in our current practice. The incisional site of 50 patients who had an elective primary arthroplasty of the hip or knee was evaluated independently by two orthopaedic clinical research fellows and two orthopaedic ward sisters for the presence or absence of surgical-site infection. Interobserver reliability was assessed by comparison of the criteria for wound infection used by the four observers using kappa reliability coefficients. Our study demonstrated that some of the components of the current CDC criteria were unreliable and we recommend their revision.