INTRODUCTION

The benefits of combining enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) interventions with an outpatient THA/TKA program are uncertain. The primary objective was to compare adverse event rate and secondly to compare pain management, functional recovery, PROMs and patients' satisfaction.

Mechanical alignment (MA) techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may introduce significant anatomic modifications, as it is known that few patients have neutral femoral, tibial or overall lower limb mechanical axes.

A total of 1000 knee CT-Scans were analyzed from a database of patients undergoing TKA. MA tibial and femoral bone resections were simulated. Femoral rotation was aligned with either the trans-epicondylar axis (TEA) or with 3° of external rotation to the posterior condyles (PC). Medial-lateral (DML) and flexion-extension (DFE) gap differences were calculated.

Extension space ML imbalances (3mm) occurred in 25% of varus and 54% of valgus knees and significant imbalances (5mm) were present in up to 8% of varus and 19% of valgus knees. For the flexion space DML, higher imbalance rates were created by the TEA technique (p < 0 .001). In valgus knees, TEA resulted in a DML in flexion of 5 mm in 42%, compared to 7% for PC. In varus knees both techniques performed better. When all the differences between DML and DFE are considered together, using TEA there were 18% of valgus knees and 49% of varus knees with < 3 mm imbalances throughout, and using PC 32% of valgus knees and 64% of varus knees.

Significant anatomic modifications with related ML or FE gap imbalances are created using MA for TKA. Using MA techniques, PC creates less imbalances than TEA. Some of these imbalances may not be correctable by the surgeon and may explain post-operative TKA instability. Current imaging technology could predict preoperatively these intrinsic imitations of MA. Other alignment techniques that better reproduce knee anatomies should be explored.

Assessing patients' functional outcomes following total hip arthroplasty with traditional scoring systems is limited by their ceiling effects. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) has been suggested as a more discriminating option. The actual score in the FJS which constitutes a “forgotten joint”, however, has not been defined. The emerging concept of joint perception led to the development of the Patient's Joint Perception question (PJP) to assess the patient's opinion of their prosthetic joint.

Two hundred fifty-seven THAs were assessed at a mean of 68 months follow-up (range 57–79). Outcomes included the WOMAC, FJS and the PJP. Correlation of the scores as well as the ceiling effects were analysed

The mean FJS was 88.5 (range 27.1–100). PJP was correlated with the FJS and WOMAC (Spearman's rho: −0.510 and 0.465 respectively). Fifty-two percent of the patients felt their hip as a natural joint (FJS CI 95% 93.3–96), 24.1% as an artificial joint with no restriction (FJS CI 95% 83.1–90.5), and 23.3% as an artificial joint with minor restrictions (FJS CI 95% 73.8–82.2). Only 0.8% had major restrictions and none reported a non-functional joint. The ceiling effect was high with both the WOMAC and FJS, with 27.2% and 31.9%. In addition, 28.6% of the patients had a WOMAC >10 and 23.4% a FJS of < 9 0 while reporting having a natural hip. Furthermore, 21.5% with a perfect WOMAC or 21.9% with a perfect FJS, reported having an artificial joint with or without limitation.

A forgotten hip perception corresponds to a FJS >93. In 20–30% of the cases, the WOMAC and FJS failed to identify the forgotten joint, or reached the maximum score when the patients did not feel their hip was natural. The PJP is a simple and reliable tool that enables identification of patients that feel their hip is natural.

For many years, achieving a neutral coronal Hip-Knee-Ankle angle (HKA) measured on radiographs has been considered a factor of success for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Lower limb HKA is influenced by the acquisition conditions, and static HKA (sHKA) may not be representative of the dynamic loading that occurs during gait. The primary aim of the study was to see if the sHKA is predictive of the dynamic HKA (dHKA). A secondary aim was to document to what degree the dHKA changes throughout gait.

We analysed the 3-D knee kinematics during gait of a cohort of 90 healthy individuals (165 knees) with the KneeKG™ system. dHKA was calculated and compared with sHKA values. Knees were considered “Stable” if the dHKA remained positive or negative – i.e. in valgus or varus – for greater than 95% of the corresponding phase and “Changer” otherwise. Patient characteristics of the Stable and Changer knees were compared to find contributing factors.

The dHKA absolute variation during gait was 10.9±5.3° [2 .4° – 28.3°] for the whole cohort. The variation was greater for the varus knees (10.3±4.8° [2.4° – 26.3°]), than for the valgus knees (12.8±6.1° [2.9° – 28.3°], p=0.008). We found a low to moderate correlation (r = 0.266 to 0.553, p < 0 .001) between sHKA and the dHKA values for varus knees and no correlation valgus knees. Twenty two percent (36/165) of the knees demonstrated a switch in the dHKA (Changer). Proportion of Changer knees was 15% for varus sHKA versus 39% for valgus sHKA (p < 0.001).

Lower limb radiographic measures of coronal alignment have limited value for predicting dynamic measures of alignment during gait.

Mechanical alignment (MA) techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) introduces significant anatomic modifications and secondary ligament imbalances. A restricted kinematic alignment (rKA) protocol was proposed to minimise these issues and improve TKA clinical results.

A total of 1000 knee CT-Scans were analyzed from a database of patients undergoing TKA. rKA tibial and femoral bone resections were simulated. rKA is defined by the following criteria: Independent tibial and femoral cuts within ± 5° of the bone neutral mechanical axis and, a resulting HKA within ± 3° of neutral. Medial-lateral (ΔML) and flexion-extension (ΔFE) gap differences were calculated and compared with MA results. With the MA technique, femoral rotation was aligned with either the trans-epicondylar axis (TEA) or with 3° of external rotation to the posterior condyles (PC).

Extension space ML imbalances (>/=3mm) occurred in 33% of TKA with MA technique versus 8% of the knees with rKA (p /=5mm) were present in up to 11% of MA knees versus 1% rKA (p < 0 .001). Using the MA technique, for the flexion space ΔML, higher imbalance rates were created by the TEA technique (p < 0 .001). rKA again performed better than both MA techniques using TEA of 3 degrees PC techniques (p < 0 .001). When all the differences between ΔML and ΔFE are considered together: using TEA there were 40.8% of the knees with < 3 mm imbalances throughout, using PC this was 55.3% and using rKA it was 91.5% of the knees (p < 0 .001).

Significantly less anatomic modifications with related ML or FE gap imbalances are created using rKA versus MA for TKA. Using rKA may help the surgeon to balance a TKA, whilst keeping the alignment within a safe range.

Background

Achieving a neutral static Hip-Knee-Ankle angle (sHKA) measured on radiographs has been considered a factor of success for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, recent studies have shown that sHKA seems to have no effect on TKA survivorship. sHKA is not representative of the dynamic loading occurring during gait, unlike the dynamic HKA (dHKA).

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, there has been a shift toward outpatient and short-stay protocols for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We developed a peri-operative THA and TKA short stay protocol following the Enhance Recovery After Surgery principles (ERAS), aiming at both optimizing patients’ outcomes and reducing the hospital length of stay. The objective of this study was to evaluate the implementation of our ERAS short-stay protocol. We hypothesized that our ERAS THA and TKA short-stay protocol would result in a lower complication rate, shorter hospital length of stay and reduced direct health care costs compared to our standard procedure.

Background

Mechanical alignment (MA) techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) introduce significant anatomic modifications and secondary ligament imbalances. A restricted kinematic alignment (rKA) protocol was proposed to minimize these issues and improve TKA clinical results.

Background

Assessing patients’ functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with traditional scoring systems is limited by their ceiling effects. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) has been suggested as a more discriminating option. The actual score in the FJS which constitutes a “forgotten joint,” however, has not been defined. The emerging concept of joint perception led to the development of the Patient's Joint Perception question (PJP) to assess the patient's opinion of their prosthetic joint.

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical alignment in TKA introduces significant anatomic modifications for many individuals, which may result in unequal medial-lateral or flexion-extension bone resections. The objective of this study was to calculate bone resection thicknesses and resulting gap sizes, simulating a measured resection mechanical alignment technique for TKA.

Aims

This study reports the mid-term results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed using a monoblock acetabular component with a large-diameter head (LDH) ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearing.

The mechanical alignment (MA) for Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with neutral alignment goal has had good overall long-term outcomes. In spite of improvements in implant designs and surgical tools aiming for better accuracy and reproducibility of surgical technique, functional outcomes of MA TKA have remained insufficient. Therefore, alternative, more anatomicaloptions restoring part (adjusted MA (aMA) and adjusted kinematic alignment (aKA) techniques) or the entire constitutional frontal deformity (unicompartment knee arthroplasty (UKA) and kinematic alignment (KA) techniques) have been developed, with promising results. The kinematic alignment for TKA is a new and attractive surgical technique enabling a patient specific treatment. The growing evidence of the kinematic alignment mid-term effectiveness, safety and potential short falls are discussed in this paper. The current review describes the rationale and the evidence behind different surgical options for knee replacement, including current concepts in alignment in TKA. We also introduce two new classification systems for “implant alignments options” (Figure 1) and “osteoarthritic knees” (Figure 2) that would help surgeons to select the best surgical option for each patient. This would also be valuable for comparison between techniques in future research.

For figures/tables, please contact authors directly.

The mechanical alignment (MA) for Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with neutral alignment goal has had good overall long-term outcomes. In spite of improvements in implant designs and surgical tools aiming for better accuracy and reproducibility of surgical technique, functional outcomes of MA TKA have remained insufficient. Therefore, alternative, more anatomical options restoring part (adjusted MA (aMA) and adjusted kinematic alignment (aKA) techniques) or the entire constitutional frontal deformity (unicompartment knee arthroplasty (UKA) and kinematic alignment (KA) techniques) have been developed, with promising results. The kinematic alignment for TKA is a new and attractive surgical technique enabling a patient specific treatment. The growing evidence of the kinematic alignment mid-term effectiveness, safety and potential short falls are discussed in this paper. The current review describes the rationale and the evidence behind different surgical options for knee replacement, including current concepts in alignment in TKA. We also introduce two new classification systems for “implant alignments options” and “osteoarthritic knees” that would help surgeons to select the best surgical option for each patient. This would also be valuable for comparison between techniques in future research.

Management of pseudotumours associated with MoM THA can be difficult and complications are frequent. The functional outcome of patients after revision surgery may be suboptimal. The objective of this study was to assess our experience with revisions of failed MoM THA due to pseudotumours.

78 hips were diagnosed with pseudotumours in 70 patients following metal-on-metal hip replacements. Of these, 68 MoM THA were revised in 62 patients. Pre operative symptoms, radiographic analysis, metal ion levels, MRI results, intra-operative findings, WOMAC scores, the satisfaction level and the complication rate were recorded.

Five patients had a resurfacing arthroplasty as their primary implants while the remaining 63 hips in 57 patients had MoM THA of different brands. The average time between the primary and revision surgery was 69 months (range 15–120). The average age at revision was 59 years (43–87). The mean follow-up was 24 months (range 2–73). 36 patients had minimal one year follow-up. Most lesions consisted of cystic changes and solid lesions were observed in 19 patients. In 57 hips, the pseudotumours were located posteriorly or postero-laterally around the greater trochanter. Intra operatively, muscle necrosis was observed in 15(22%) patients. Most THA cases demonstrated wear and corrosion at the head neck junction of the femoral implants. Thirty-five patients (44.9%) had greater than 50 degrees of cup abduction, including 10 patients (12.8%) with an abduction angle greater than 60 degrees. The average pre operative and postoperative Co ion levels were 27.46 ug/L (range 0.36–145.6) and 2.46 (range 0.4–12.48), respectively. Post revision, a total of 10 hips (14.7%) sustained a dislocation, with seven (10.3%) of them experiencing recurrent dislocations. In 8/10 hips, the femoral head size was 36mm or greater. Revision for dislocation occurred in seven(10.3%) patients. Three(4.4%) deep and one(1.47%) superficial infections occurred and deep infections were re-operated. One(1.47%) fracture of the greater trochanter and one (1.47%) psoas tendinitis did not need revision. Therefore, a total of 10 patients (14.7%) were reoperated. 6 revisions for instability were performed in the first 34 patients, while 1 were done in the last 34 patients. At one year post revision surgery, the mean WOMAC score was 19.68 (range 0–48). In comparison, the mean WOMAC score of the same patients one year after their primary surgery was 8.1 (0–63). Patient satisfaction level of patients one year post revision surgery was 7.61 (range 5–10) compared to 4.15 (range 0–7) pre-revision one.

The complication rate after revision of pseudotumours is high. Most re revisions occurred secondary to instability despite the use of larger femoral heads. The functional outcome at one year post revision seems to be lower than that seen after primary THA but similar to other revisions in the literature. Experience in the management of these patients may reduce the complication rate.

Modifying Knee anatomy during mechanical Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) may impact ligament balance, patellar tracking and quadriceps function. Although well fixed, patients may report high levels (20%) of dissatisfaction. One theory is that putting the knee in neutral mechanical alignment may be responsible for these unsatisfactory results. Kinematic TKA has gained interest in recent years; it aims to resurface the knee joint and preservation of natural femoral flexion axis about which the tibia and patella articulate, recreating the native knee without the need for soft tissue relaease. That's being said, it remains the question of whether all patients are suitable for kinematic alignment. Some patients' anatomy may be inherently biomechanically inferior and recreating native anatomy in these patients may result in early implant failure. The senior author (PAV) has been performing Kinematic TKA since 2011, and has developed an algorithm in order to better predict which patient may benefit from this technique.

Lower limb CT scans from 4884 consecutive patients scheduled for TKA arthroplasty were analysed. These exams were performed for patient-specific instrumentation production (My Knee®, Medacta, Switzerland). Multiple anatomical landmarks used to create accurate CT-based preoperative planning and determine the mechanical axis of bone for the femur and tibia and overall Hip-knee-Ankle (HKA). We wanted to test the safe range for kinematic TKA for the planned distal resection of the femur and tibia. Safe range algorithm was defined as the combination of the following criteria: – Independent tibial and femoral cuts within ± 5° of the bone neutral mechanical axis and HKA within ± 3°. The purpose of this study is to verify the applicability of the proposed safe range algorithm on a large sample of individual scheduled for TKA.

The preoperative tibial mechanical angle average 2.9 degrees in varus, femoral mechanical angle averaged 2.7 degrees in valgus and overall HKA averaged of 0.1 in varus. There were 2475 (51%) knees out of 4884, with femur and tibia mechanical axis within ±5° and HKA within ±3° without need for bony corrections. After applying the algorithm, a total of 4062 cases (83%) were successfully been evaluated using the proposed protocol to reach a safe range of HKA ±3° with minimal correction. The remaining 822 cases (17%) could not be managed by the proposed algorithm because of their unusual anatomies and were dealt with individually.

In this study, we tested a proposed algorithm to perform kinematic alignment TKA avoiding preservation/restoration of some extreme anatomies that might not be suitable for TKA long-term survivorship. A total of 4062 cases (83%) were successfully eligible for our proposed safe range algorithm for kinematic TKA. In conclusion, kinematically aligned TKA may be a promising option to improve normal knee function restoration and patient satisfaction. Until we have valuable data confirming the compatibility of all patients' pre arthritic anatomies with TKA long-term survivorship, we believe that kinematically alignment should be performed within some limits. Further studies with Radiostereometry or longer follow up might help determine if all patients' anatomies are suitable for Kinematic TKA.

Large bearing surfaces are appealing in total hip arthroplasty (THA) as they may help create a greater range of impingement free motion and reduce the risk of dislocation. However, attempts to achieve this with a metal bearing surface have been blighted by adverse reactions to metal debris. Ceramic bearings have a good long-term track record in more conventional head sizes, and manufacturing techniques now permit the use of larger ceramic bearing surfaces using monoblock uncemented acetabular components. In this study, we are reviewing the early results of the Maxera® acetabular component (Zimmer, Indiana) at our institution.

All data was collected prospectively. Maxera® acetabular component is a Titanium (Ti) shell with plasma sprayed Ti for the osteointegrative surface. Delta ceramic liner is inserted & locked into the cup shell by the manufacturer (non-modular). With the Maxera cup system, the bearing diameter is dictated by the acetabular component size. Acetabular components (AC) of 46 and 48 mm have a bearing diameter (BD) of 36 mm, AC of 50 and 52 mm: have a 40 mm BD, AC of 54 and 56 mm: have a BD of 44 mm and AC of 58–64: have a 48mm BD. Delta ceramic femoral head size of 44 and 48 mm have a modular Ti sleeve between the head and femoral stem trunnion. Femoral head sizes of 36 and 40 mm have no Ti sleeve. All THA had an uncemented femoral stem. Implants were inserted with a posterior approach. Patients were reviewed at 6 weeks, 6 months and then annually with radiographs. Clinical function was evaluated using WOMAC and UCLA scores along with joint perception questionnaires.

Five hundred components have been implanted in 442 patients (250 women, 192 men) with a mean age of 55, (min 17, max 80) and a mean BMI of 26.9 (min 17.8, max 51). The mean acetabular size was 54 (min 46, max 64), leading to a mean femoral head size of 44. At a minimum of two years follow-up (mean 3.8 years): 5 patients have been revised, 4 secondary to undetected intraoperative fracture of the femur and only one due to early displacement of a Maxera® cup (0.2%). Five patients reported a mild squeaking; two reported clicking and one patient presented with a symptomatic heterotopic ossification. The WOMAC score improved significantly post-operatively, (57.4 compared to 4.4 post-operatively, p<0.001). The mean post-operative UCLA score was 6.9. Sixty percent (60.6%) of patients rated their joint perception as either “natural” or “artificial without limitation”. two patients (0.4%) suffered a dislocation after high velocity trauma without recurrence after closed reduction. No ceramic component fracture was recorded.

This prospective study shows that this monoblock acetabular component provides an easy implantation with minimal complications. The ceramic bearing surface provides good clinical function and joint perception. Bearing surfaces of this design may provide an alternative to large head metal on metal (MoM) implants without the side effects of metal debris/ions.

This randomised trial evaluated the outcome of a single design of unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee (UKA) with either a cemented all-polyethylene or a metal-backed modular tibial component. A total of 63 knees in 45 patients (17 male, 28 female) were included, 27 in the all-polyethylene group and 36 in the metal-backed group. The mean age was 57.9 years (39.6 to 76.9). At a mean follow-up of 6.4 years (5 to 9.9), 11 all-polyethylene components (41%) were revised (at a mean of 5.8 years; 1.4 to 8.0) post-operatively and two metal-backed components were revised (at one and five years). One revision in both groups was for unexplained pain, one in the metal-backed group was for progression of osteoarthritis. The others in the all-polyethylene group were for aseptic loosening. The survivorship at seven years calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method for the all-polyethylene group was 56.5% (95% CI 31.9 to 75.2, number at risk 7) and for the metal-backed group was 93.8% (95% CI 77.3 to 98.4, number at risk 16) This difference was statistically significant (p <  0.001). At the most recent follow-up, significantly better mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index Scores were found in the all-polyethylene group (13.4 vs 23.0, p = 0.03) but there was no difference in the mean Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome scores (68.8; 41.4 to 99.0 vs 62.6; 24.0 to 100.0), p = 0.36). There were no significant differences for range of movement (p = 0.36) or satisfaction (p = 0.23).

This randomised study demonstrates that all-polyethylene components in this design of fixed bearing UKA had unsatisfactory results with significantly higher rates of failure before ten years compared with the metal-back components.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:786–92.

A total of 219 hips in 192 patients aged between 18 and 65 years were randomised to 28-mm metal-on-metal uncemented total hip replacements (THRs, 107 hips) or hybrid hip resurfacing (HR, 112 hips). At a mean follow-up of eight years (6.6 to 9.3) there was no significant difference between the THR and HR groups regarding rate of revision (4.0% (4 of 99) vs 5.8% (6 of 104), p = 0.569) or re-operation rates without revision (5.1% (5 of 99) vs 2.9% (3 of 104), p = 0.428). In the THR group one recurrent dislocation, two late deep infections and one peri-prosthetic fracture required revision, whereas in the HR group five patients underwent revision for femoral head loosening and one for adverse reaction to metal debris. The mean University of California, Los Angeles activity scores were significantly higher in HR (7.5 (sd 1.7) vs 6.9 (sd 1.7), p = 0.035), but similar mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores were obtained (5.8 (sd 9.5) in HR vs 5.1 (sd 8.9) in THR, p = 0.615) at the last follow-up. Osteolysis was found in 30 of 81 THR patients (37.4%), mostly in the proximal femur, compared with two of 83 HR patients (2.4%) (p < 0.001). At five years the mean metal ion levels were < 2.5 μg/l for cobalt and chromium in both groups; only titanium was significantly higher in the HR group (p = 0.001). Although revision rates and functional scores were similar in both groups at mid-term, long-term survival analysis is necessary to determine whether one procedure is more advantageous than the other.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1464–73.

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to determine the rate of conversion from RSA to THR in a number of Canadian centers performing resurfacings

Purpose: Even with modern ancillary and good surgical experience, rotational implant positioning is sometimes sub-optimal, leading to poor results. Except for obvious cases with patellar instability, the symptoms are often vague and non-contributive to the diagnosis of failure. This is why implant malpositioning and particularly malrotational postioning remain an underestimated cause of failure after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We report our experience with TKA revision for rotational malpositioning.

Method: We retrospectively assessed the results of TKA revisions in 22 knees for malrotational positioning. In all cases, malrotational implant positioning was confirmed by CT-scan according to Berger’s protocol.

Results: Mean age was 66 years (47–74) at the time of the primary TKA. After the index procedure, all patients presented early anterior knee pain with patellar instability (tilt and subluxation in ten cases, and permanent patellar dislocation in two cases). Malrotational positioning predominated on the tibial component with mean 23° internal rotation. Mean cumulative malrotation (tibial plus femur) was 22° internal rotation. All but four patients underwent femoral and tibial component revision. In two cases, only the tibial component was revised, and in two other cases, isolated transposition of the anterior tibial tuberosity was carried out. One was a failure, and finally underwent a successful full revision. At a mean follow-up of 30 months (12–60), we noted significant functional outcome improvement. One patient, who underwent a patellectomy previously at the index TKA procedure, had persistant anterior knee pain. No patient presented patellar instability.

Conclusion: The diagnosis of implant malrotational positioning is sometimes difficult. The most common errors are tibial component positioning. In case of suspicion of malrotational positioning, protocolized CT-scan allows quick and simple diagnosis. If the malrotation is confirmed, TKA revision should be performed upon patient disability and severity of the symptoms. It is important not to delay the surgery, particularly in cases of patellofemoral dislocation because of the risks of developing soft tissue contractures resulting in a more difficult revision procedure.