Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1503 - 1509
1 Nov 2014
Ritter MA Davis KE Small SR Merchun JG Farris A

The relationship between post-operative bone density and subsequent failure of total knee replacement (TKR) is not known. This retrospective study aimed to determine the relationship between bone density and failure, both overall and according to failure mechanism. All 54 aseptic failures occurring in 50 patients from 7760 consecutive primary cemented TKRs between 1983 and 2004 were matched with non-failing TKRs, and 47 failures in 44 patients involved tibial failures with the matching characteristics of age (65.1 for failed and 69.8 for non-failed), gender (70.2% female), diagnosis (93.6% OA), date of operation, bilaterality, pre-operative alignment (0.4 and 0.3 respectively), and body mass index (30.2 and 30.0 respectively). In each case, the density of bone beneath the tibial component was assessed at each follow-up interval using standardised, calibrated radiographs. Failing knees were compared with controls both overall and, as a subgroup analysis, by failure mechanism. Knees were compared with controls using univariable linear regression.

Significant and continuous elevation in tibial density was found in knees that eventually failed by medial collapse (p < 0.001) and progressive radiolucency (p < 0.001) compared with controls, particularly in the medial region of the tibia. Knees failing due to ligamentous instability demonstrated an initial decline in density (p = 0.0152) followed by a non-decreasing density over time (p = 0.034 for equivalence). Non-failing knees reported a decline in density similar to that reported previously using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). Differences between failing and non-failing knees were observable as early as two months following surgery. This tool may be used to identify patients at risk of failure following TKR, but more validation work is needed.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1503–9.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1484 - 1489
1 Nov 2013
Meding JB Ritter MA Davis KE Farris A

The strain on clinic and surgeon resources resulting from a rise in demand for total knee replacement (TKR) requires reconsideration of when and how often patients need to be seen for follow-up. Surgeons will otherwise require increased paramedical staff or need to limit the number of TKRs they undertake. We reviewed the outcome data of 16 414 primary TKRs undertaken at our centre to determine the time to re-operation for any reason and for specific failure mechanisms. Peak risk years for failure were determined by comparing the conditional probability of failure, the number of failures divided by the total number of TKRs cases, for each year. The median times to failure for the most common failure mechanisms were 4.9 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1.7 to 10.7) for femoral and tibial loosening, 1.9 years (IQR 0.8 to 3.9) for infection, 3.1 years (IQR 1.6 to 5.5) for tibial collapse and 5.6 years (IQR 3.4 to 9.3) for instability. The median time to failure for all revisions was 3.3 years (IQR 1.2 to 8.5), with an overall revision rate of 1.7% (n = 282). Results from our patient population suggest that patients be seen for follow-up at six months, one year, three years, eight years, 12 years, and every five years thereafter. Patients with higher pain in the early post-operative period or high body mass index (≥ 41 kg/m2) should be monitored more closely.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1484–9.