Aims. 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. Methods. 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. Results. The lifetime risk of revision was highest in the youngest age group (46 to 50 years; 40.4%) and decreased sequentially to the oldest (86 to 90 years; 3.7%). Across all age groups, lifetime risk of revision was higher for females (ranging from 4.3% to 43.4% vs males 2.9% to 37.4%) and patients with a higher ASA grade (ASA 3 to 4, ranging from 8.8% to 41.2% vs ASA 1 1.8% to 29.8%). The lifetime risk of revision for UKA was double that of TKA across all age groups (ranging from 3.7% to 40.4% for UKA, and 1.6% to 22.4% for TKA). The higher risk of revision in younger patients was associated with aseptic loosening in both sexes and pain in females. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) accounted for 4% of all UKA revisions, in contrast with 27% for TKA; the risk of PJI was higher for males than females for both procedures. Conclusion. Lifetime risk of revision may be a more meaningful measure of arthroplasty outcomes than implant survival at defined time periods. This study highlights the higher lifetime risk of UKA revision for younger patients, females, and those with a higher ASA grade, which can aid with patient counselling prior to UKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):672–679

Aims. To date, no study has demonstrated an improvement in postoperative outcomes following elective joint arthroplasty with a focus on nutritional intervention for patients with preoperative hypoalbuminaemia. In this prospective study, we evaluated differences in the hospital length of stay (LOS), rate of re-admission, and total patient charges for a malnourished patient study population who received a specific nutrition protocol before surgery. Patients and Methods. An analytical report was extracted from the electronic medical record (EMR; Epic, Verona, Wisconsin) of a five-hospital network joint arthroplasty patient data set between 2014 and 2017. A total of 4733 patients underwent joint arthroplasty and had preoperative measurement of albumin levels: 2220 at four hospitals and 2513 at the study hospital. Albumin ≤ 3.4 g/l, designated as malnutrition, was found in 543 patients (11.5%). A nutritional intervention programme focusing on a high-protein, anti-inflammatory diet was initiated in January 2017 at one study hospital. Hospital LOS, re-admission rate, and 90-day charges were compared for differential change between patients in study and control hospitals for all elective hip and knee arthroplasty patients, and for malnourished patients over time as the nutrition intervention was implemented. Results. Malnourished patients with nutritional intervention at the study hospital had shorter hospital LOS beginning in 2017 than malnourished patients at control hospitals during the same period (p = 0.04). Similarly, this cohort had significantly lower primary hospitalization charges, charges associated with hospital re-admissions, and 90-day total charges (p < 0.001). Inclusion of covariant potential confounders (age, anaemia, diabetes, and obesity) did not alter the conclusions of the primary statistical analysis. Conclusion. Joint arthroplasty outcomes were positively affected in study patients with low albumin when a high-protein, anti-inflammatory diet was encouraged. Elective surgery was neither cancelled nor delayed with a malnutrition designation. While the entire network population experienced improved postoperative outcomes, malnourished control patients did not experience this improvement. This study demonstrated that education on malnutrition can benefit patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(7 Supple C):17–21

Aims

This study aimed to describe the use of revision knee arthroplasty in Australia and examine changes in lifetime risk over a decade.

Aims

It has been shown that the preoperative modification of risk factors associated with obesity may reduce complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the optimal method of doing so remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a preoperative Risk Stratification Tool (RST) devised in our institution could reduce unexpected intensive care unit (ICU) transfers and 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and reoperations after TKA in obese patients.

Aims

The aim of this study was to measure the effect of hospital case volume on the survival of revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA).

The Oxford knee score (OKS) is a validated and widely accepted disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure, but there is limited evidence regarding any long-term trends in the score. We reviewed 5600 individual OKS questionnaires (1547 patients) from a prospectively-collected knee replacement database, to determine the trends in OKS over a ten-year period following total knee replacement. The mean OKS pre-operatively was 19.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 18.8 to 20.2). The maximum post-operative OKS was observed at two years (mean score 34.4 (95% CI 33.7 to 35.2)), following which a gradual but significant decline was observed through to the ten-year assessment (mean score 30.1 (95% CI 29.1 to 31.1)) (p < 0.001). A similar trend was observed for most of the individual OKS components (p < 0.001). Kneeling ability initially improved in the first year but was then followed by rapid deterioration (p < 0.001). Pain severity exhibited the greatest improvement, although residual pain was reported in over two-thirds of patients post-operatively, and peak improvement in the night pain component did not occur until year four. Post-operative OKS was lower for women (p < 0.001), those aged < 60 years (p < 0.003) and those with a body mass index > 35 kg/m. 2. (p < 0.014), although similar changes in scores were observed. This information may assist surgeons in advising patients of their expected outcomes, as well as providing a comparative benchmark for evaluating longer-term outcomes following knee replacement. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:45–51

Obesity is an epidemic across both the developed and developing nations that is possibly the most important current public health factor affecting the morbidity and mortality of the global population. Obese patients have the potential to pose several challenges for arthroplasty surgeons from the standpoint of the influence obesity has on osteoarthritic symptoms, their peri-operative medical management, the increased intra-operative technical demands on the surgeon, the intra- and post-operative complications, the long term outcomes of total hip and knee arthroplasty. Also, there is no consensus on the role the arthroplasty surgeon should have in facilitating weight loss for these patients, nor whether obesity should affect the access to arthroplasty procedures.

Following arthroplasty of the knee, the patient’s perception of improvement in symptoms is fundamental to the assessment of outcome. Better clinical outcome may offset the inferior survival observed for some types of implant. By examining linked National Joint Registry (NJR) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data, we aimed to compare PROMs collected at a minimum of six months post-operatively for total (TKR: n = 23 393) and unicondylar knee replacements (UKR: n = 505). Improvements in knee-specific (Oxford knee score, OKS) and generic (EuroQol, EQ-5D) scores were compared and adjusted for case-mix differences using multiple regression. Whereas the improvements in the OKS and EQ-5D were significantly greater for TKR than for UKR, once adjustments were made for case-mix differences and pre-operative score, the improvements in the two scores were not significantly different. The adjusted mean differences in the improvement of OKS and EQ-5D were 0.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.9 to 0.9; p = 0.96) and 0.009 (95% CI -0.034 to 0.015; p = 0.37), respectively.

We found no difference in the improvement of either knee-specific or general health outcomes between TKR and UKR in a large cohort of registry patients. With concerns about significantly higher revision rates for UKR observed in worldwide registries, we question the widespread use of an arthroplasty that does not confer a significant benefit in clinical outcome.

The management of the patella during total knee replacement is controversial. In some studies the absence of patellar resurfacing results in residual anterior knee pain in over 10% of patients. One form of treatment which may be used in an endeavour to reduce this is circumferential patellar rim electrocautery. This is believed to partially denervate the patella. However, there is no evidence of the efficacy of this procedure, nor do we know if it results in harm.

A retrospective comparative cohort study was performed of 192 patients who had undergone a primary total knee replacement with the porous coated Low Contact Stress rotating platform prosthesis without patellar resurfacing between 2003 and 2007. In 98 patients circumferential electrocautery of the patellar rim was performed and in 94 patients it was not. The two groups were matched for gender and age. The general Oxford Knee Score and the more specific patellar score for anterior knee pain were used to assess patient outcomes a minimum of two years post-operatively.

No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups for either scoring system (p = 0.41 and p = 0.87, respectively). Electrocautery of the patella rim did not improve the outcome scores after primary total knee replacement in our patients.