Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) in elderly patients (>85 years) is associated with increased mortality, hospital stay and a high rate (55%) of complications. The objective was to assess PROMs in elderly patients undergoing rTKA. A retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing rTKA at an arthroplasty centre from 2001–2022 were compared to a control group (aged 50–79y) matched for gender, diagnosis & surgery year. The commonest reasons for revision in elderly patients was aseptic loosening (53/100), infection (21/100) and fracture (7/100). One-year patient-reported outcome data was available for 64%.Abstract
Introduction
Methods
There is little published literature to support the claim that a successful total knee replacement (TKR) is predictive of future good outcomes on the contralateral side. The objective was to identify whether outcome from the first of staged TKRs could be used to predict the outcome of the contralateral TKR. This was a retrospective cohort study of 1687 patients over a 25-year period undergoing staged bilateral TKRs in a UK arthroplasty centre. A control group of 1687 patients undergoing unilateral TKR with matched characteristics was identified. Primary outcomes: satisfaction and Knee Society Score (KSS) at one year.Abstract
Introduction
Methodology
The primary stability of the cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) relies on interference fit (or press fit). Insufficient interference may cause implant loosening, whilst excessive interference could cause bone damage and fracture. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal interference fit by measuring the force required to seat the tibial component of the cementless OUKR (push-in force) and the force required to remove the component (pull-out force). Six cementless OUKR tibial components were implanted in 12 new slots prepared on blocks of solid polyurethane foam (20 pounds per cubic foot (PCF), Sawbones, Malmo, Sweden) with a range of interference of 0.1 mm to 1.9 mm using a Dartec materials testing machine HC10 (Zwick Ltd, Herefordshire, United Kingdom) . The experiment was repeated with cellular polyurethane foam (15 PCF), which is a more porous analogue for trabecular bone.Objectives
Materials and Methods