The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between reason for revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and outcomes in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We reviewed a prospective cohort of 647 patients undergoing full or partial rTHA at a single high-volume centre with a minimum of two years’ follow-up. The reasons for revision were classified as: infection; aseptic loosening; dislocation; structural failure; and painful THA for other reasons. PROMs (modified Oxford Hip Score (mOHS), EuroQol five-dimension three-level health questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) score, and visual analogue scales for pain during rest and activity), complication rates, and failure rates were compared among the groups.Aims
Methods
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has a higher risk of revision than total knee arthroplasty (TKA), particularly for younger patients. The outcome of knee arthroplasty is typically defined as implant survival or revision incidence after a defined number of years. This can be difficult for patients to conceptualize. We aimed to calculate the ‘lifetime risk’ of revision for UKA as a more meaningful estimate of risk projection over a patient’s remaining lifetime, and to compare this to TKA. Incidence of revision and mortality for all primary UKAs performed from 1999 to 2019 (n = 13,481) was obtained from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR). Lifetime risk of revision was calculated for patients and stratified by age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade.Aims
Methods
Aims. The current study aimed to compare robotic arm-assisted (RA-THA), computer-assisted (CA-THA), and manual (M-THA) total hip arthroplasty regarding in-hospital metrics including length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, in-hospital complications, and cost of RA-THA versus M-THA and CA-THA versus M-THA, as well as trends in use and uptake over a ten-year period, and future projections of uptake and use of RA-THA and CA-THA. Methods. The National Inpatient Sample was queried for primary THAs (2008 to 2017) which were categorized into RA-THA, CA-THA, and M-THA. Past and projected use, demographic characteristics distribution, income, type of insurance, location, and healthcare setting were compared among the three cohorts. In-hospital complications, LOS, discharge disposition, and in-hospital costs were compared between propensity score-matched cohorts of M-THA versus RA-THA and M-THA versus CA-THA to adjust for baseline characteristics and comorbidities. Results. RA-THA and CA-THA did not exhibit any clinically meaningful reduction in mean LOS (RA-THA 2.2 days (SD 1.4) vs 2.3 days (SD 1.8); p < 0.001, and CA-THA 2.5 days (SD 1.9) vs 2.7 days (SD 2.3); p < 0.001, respectively) compared to their respective propensity score-matched M-THA cohorts. RA-THA, but not CA-THA, had similar non-home discharge rates to M-THA (RA-THA 17.4% vs 18.5%; p = 0.205, and 18.7% vs 24.9%; p < 0.001, respectively). Implant-related mechanical complications were lower in RA-THA (RA-THA 0.5% vs M-THA 3.1%; p < 0.001, and CA-THA 1.2% vs M-THA 2.2%; p < 0.001), which was associated with a significantly lower in-hospital dislocation (RA-THA 0.1% vs M-THA 0.8%; p < 0.001). Both RA-THA and CA-THA demonstrated higher mean higher index in-hospital costs (RA-THA $18,416 (SD $8,048) vs M-THA $17,266 (SD $8,396); p < 0.001, and CA-THA $20,295 (SD $8,975) vs M-THA $18,624 (SD $9,226); p < 0.001, respectively).
This study used an artificial neural network (ANN) model to determine the most important pre- and perioperative variables to predict same-day discharge in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Data for this study were collected from the National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from the year 2018. Patients who received a primary, elective, unilateral TKA with a diagnosis of primary osteoarthritis were included. Demographic, preoperative, and intraoperative variables were analyzed. The ANN model was compared to a logistic regression model, which is a conventional machine-learning algorithm. Variables collected from 28,742 patients were analyzed based on their contribution to hospital length of stay.Aims
Methods
To determine mortality risk after first revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF), and to compare this to mortality risk after primary and first revision THA for other common indications. The study cohort consisted of THAs recorded in the National Joint Registry between 2003 and 2015, linked to national mortality data. First revision THAs for PFF, infection, dislocation, and aseptic loosening were identified. We used a flexible parametric model to estimate the cumulative incidence function of death at 90 days, one year, and five years following first revision THA and primary THA, in the presence of further revision as a competing risk. Analysis covariates were age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade.Aims
Methods
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty
(THA) are recognised and proven interventions for patients with
advanced arthritis. Studies to date have demonstrated a steady increase
in the requirement for primary and revision procedures. Projected
estimates made for the United States show that by 2030 the demand
for primary TKA will grow by 673% and for revision TKA by 601% from
the level in 2005. For THA the projected estimates are 174% and
137% for primary and revision surgery, respectively. The purpose
of this study was to see if those predictions were similar for England
and Wales using data from the National Joint Registry and the Office
of National Statistics. Analysis of data for England and Wales suggest that by 2030,
the volume of primary and revision TKAs will have increased by 117%
and 332%, respectively between 2012 and 2030. The data for the United
States translates to a 306% cumulative rate of increase between
2012 and 2030 for revision surgery, which is similar to our predictions
for England and Wales. The predictions from the United States for primary TKA were similar
to our upper limit projections. For THA, we predicted an increase
of 134% and 31% for primary and revision hip surgery, respectively. Our model has limitations, however, it highlights the economic
burden of arthroplasty in the future in England and Wales as a real
and unaddressed problem. This will have significant implications
for the provision of health care and the management of orthopaedic
services in the future. Cite this article:
