Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA) entailing increased mortality, decreased quality of life, and high healthcare costs. In 2009 a nationwide, multidisciplinary infection control program was launched in Sweden, PRISS, which aimed to reduce the PJI burden by 50%. The primary aim was to investigate whether the PRISS project reduced PJI incidence after primary THA; the secondary aim was to evaluate other possible benefits of PRISS, such as shorter time to diagnosis. We obtained data on patients undergoing primary THA in Sweden (n = 45,723 patients, 49,946 THAs), 2012–2014. Using personal identity numbers, this cohort was matched with the Swedish Prescribed Drug Registry. Medical records of patients with ≥4 weeks antibiotic consumption were reviewed to verify PJI diagnosis (n = 2240, 2569 THAs).Aim
Method
Increased collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) in registries enables international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after knee and hip replacement. We aimed to investigate 1) variations in PROM improvement, 2) the possible confounding factor of BMI, and 3) differences in comorbidity distributions between registries. Registries affiliated with the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) or OECD membership countries were invited to report aggregate EQ-5D, OKS, OHS, HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS values. Eligible patients underwent primary total, unilateral knee or hip replacement for osteoarthritis within three years and had completed PROMs preoperatively and either 6 or 12 months postoperatively, excluding patients with subsequent revisions. For each PROM cohort, Chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (male/female, age 20-64/65-74/>75, high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were reported for available comorbidity indexes. Thirteen registries from 9 countries contributed data, n~130000 knee (range 140 to 79848) and n~113000 hip (range 137 to 85281). Mean EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.53 to 0.71 (knee) and 0.50 to 0.70 (hips) preoperatively and 0.78 to 0.85 (knee) and 0.83 to 0.87 (hip) postoperatively. Mean OKS (6 registries) ranged from 19.3 to 23.6 preoperatively and 36.2 to 41.2 postoperatively. Mean OHS (7 registries) ranged from 18.0 to 23.2 preoperatively and 39.8 to 44.2 postoperatively. Four registries reported KOOS-PS and three reported HOOS-PS. Proportions of patients with BMI >30 ranged from 35 to 62% (10 knee registries) and 16 to 43% (11 hip registries). For both knee and hip registries, distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed significantly among registries (p30 were for patients in the youngest age groups (20 to 64 and 65 to 74 years) with the lowest baseline scores. Additionally, females with lowest preoperative PROM scores had highest BMI. These findings were echoed for the OHS and OKS cohorts. Proportions of patients with ASA scores ≥3 ranged from 7 to 42% (9 knee registries) and 6 to 35% (8 hip registries). PROM-score improvement varies between international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, sex and preoperative scores. BMI and comorbidity may be relevant to adjust for.
Previous publications have suggested that the incidence of revisions due to infection after THA is increasing. We performed updated time-trend analyses of risk and timing of revision due to infection after primary THAs in the Nordic countries during the period 2004–2018. 569,463 primary THAs reported to the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association from 2004 through 2018 were studied. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence interval by Cox regression with the first revision due to infection after primary THA as endpoint. The risk of revision was investigated. In addition, we explored changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection.Aim
Methods
When following patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements, current evidence suggests that orthopaedic surgeons should avoid reliance on any single investigative tool. In 2014, guidelines for stratifying patients with MoM hip replacement into groups of low, medium, and high risk of failure based on multiple criteria were published. However, such risk stratification guidelines can be difficult to interpret due to the numerous risk factors related to MoM hip replacements. This is especially true for patients with various (high and low) risk levels for different criteria within the guidelines. The first purpose of this study was to assess if a scoring system can be applied to the current MoM guidelines. The second purpose was to test, using this scoring system, how the contemporary guidelines would classify a cohort of patients with a recalled MoM hip replacement system. The study population consisted of 1301 patients (1434 hips) enrolled from September 2012 to June 2015 in a multicenter follow-up study of a recalled MoM hip replacement system at a mean of 6.2 (range 2.4 – 11.2) years from index surgery. Eleven required scoring criteria were determined based on existing follow-up algorithm recommendations and consisted of patient factors, symptoms, clinical status, implant type, metal ion levels, and radiographic imaging results. Criteria considered ‘low’ risk were given 1 point, 2 points for ‘moderate’ risk, and 3 points for the ‘high’ risk group. Forward stepwise logistic regression was conducted to determine the minimum set of predictive variables for risk of revision and assign variable weights. The MoM risk score for each hip was then created by averaging the weighted values of each predictive variable.Introduction
Methods
48 patients (52 hips), with osteoarthritis, participated in a 5 year RSA study. Each patient received a VEPE liner, a porous titanium coated shell, and an uncemented stem with a 32mm head. Tantalum beads were inserted into the VEPE and the femur to measure head wear and stem stability using RSA. RSA and PROM follow-up was obtained postoperatively, 6 months, 1, 2, 3, and 5 years after surgery. The Wilcoxon signed-ranks test determined if changes in penetration or migration were significant (p≤0.05).Introduction
Methods