Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a potential treatment
for isolated bone on bone osteoarthritis when limited to a single
compartment. The risk for revision of UKA is three times higher
than for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this review was
to discuss the different revision options after UKA failure. A search was performed for English language articles published
between 2006 and 2016. After reviewing titles and abstracts, 105
papers were selected for further analysis. Of these, 39 papers were
deemed to contain clinically relevant data to be included in this review.Objectives
Materials and Methods
Nonagenarians (aged 90 to 99 years) have experienced the fastest percent decile population growth in the USA recently, with a consequent increase in the prevalence of nonagenarians living with joint arthroplasties. As such, the number of revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) in nonagenarians is expected to increase. We aimed to determine the mortality rate, implant survivorship, and complications of nonagenarians undergoing aseptic revision THAs and revision TKAs. Our institutional total joint registry was used to identify 96 nonagenarians who underwent 97 aseptic revisions (78 hips and 19 knees) between 1997 and 2018. The most common indications were aseptic loosening and periprosthetic fracture for both revision THAs and revision TKAs. Mean age at revision was 92 years (90 to 98), mean BMI was 27 kg/m2 (16 to 47), and 67% (n = 65) were female. Mean time between primary and revision was 18 years (SD 9). Kaplan-Meier survival was used for patient mortality, and compared to age- and sex-matched control populations. Reoperation risk was assessed using cumulative incidence with death as a competing risk. Mean follow-up was five years.Aims
Methods
Breast cancer survivors have known risk factors that might influence the results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study evaluated clinical outcomes of patients with breast cancer history after primary THA and TKA. Our total joint registry identified patients with breast cancer history undergoing primary THA (n = 423) and TKA (n = 540). Patients were matched 1:1 based upon age, sex, BMI, procedure (hip or knee), and surgical year to non-breast cancer controls. Mortality, implant survival, and complications were assessed via Kaplan-Meier methods. Clinical outcomes were evaluated via Harris Hip Scores (HHSs) or Knee Society Scores (KSSs). Mean follow-up was six years (2 to 15).Aims
Methods
Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a widely accepted form of surgical treatment for patients with an early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary arthroplasty. The outcome of DAIR after revision arthroplasty, however, has not been reported. The aim of this study was to report the success rate of DAIR after revision arthroplasty with a follow-up of two years. This retrospective study, conducted at the Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, included 88 patients who underwent DAIR within 90 days of revision total hip or total knee arthroplasty between 2012 and 2019. Details of the surgical procedures and PJI were collected. Univariate analysis and a subgroup analysis of the culture-positive group were performed. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were constructed.Aims
Methods
Calprotectin (CLP) is produced in neutrophils and monocytes and released into body fluids as a result of inflammation or infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of blood and synovial CLP in the diagnosis of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Blood and synovial fluid samples were collected prospectively from 195 patients undergoing primary or revision hip and knee arthroplasty. Patients were divided into five groups: 1) primary total hip and knee arthroplasty performed due to idiopathic osteoarthritis (OA; n = 60); 2) revision hip and knee arthroplasty performed due to aseptic failure of the implant (AR-TJR; n = 40); 3) patients with a confirmed diagnosis of chronic PJI awaiting surgery (n = 45); 4) patients who have finished the first stage of the PJI treatment with the use of cemented spacer and were qualified for replantation procedure (SR-TJR; n = 25), and 5) patients with rheumatoid arthritis undergoing primary total hip and knee arthroplasty (RA; n = 25). CLP concentrations were measured quantitatively in the blood and synovial fluid using an immunoturbidimetric assay. Additionally, blood and synovial CRP, blood interleukin-6 (IL-6), and ESR were measured, and a leucocyte esterase (LE) strip test was performed.Aims
Methods
The Oxford hip and knee scores (OHS and OKS)
are validated patient-reported outcome measures used in patients undergoing
total hip replacement (THR), hip resurfacing (HR), total knee replacement
(TKR) and unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). We analysed the
absolute OHS and OKS and change in scores following THR, HR, TKR,
and UKR performed at one specialist centre. All patients undergoing
and completing at least one Oxford score were eligible for inclusion
in the study which included 27 950 OHS and 19 750 OKS in 13 682
patients. Data were analysed using non-linear quantile regression.
The median absolute Oxford scores for THR, HR, TKR and UKR were
pre-operative 68.8% (15.0/48), 58.3% (20.0/48), 66.7% (16.0/48),
60.4% (19.0/48) respectively: and post-operative asymptote was 14.6%
(41.0/48), 5.8% (45.2/48), 31.2% (33.0/48), 29.2% (34.0/48). The
median asymptotic change from the pre-operative score for THR, HR,
TKR and UKR were 47.9% (23.0/48), 47.9% (23.0/48), 33.3% (16.0/48)
and 32.4% (15.5/48), respectively. The median time at which no further
appreciable change in score was achieved post-operatively was 0.7
years for THR, 1.1 years for HR, 0.9 years for TKR and 1.1 years
for UKR. The curves produced from this analysis could be used to educate
patients, and to audit the performance of a surgeon and an institution.
The time to achieve a stable improvement in outcome varied between
different types of joint replacement, which may have implications
for the timing of post-operative review. Cite this article:
Between 1988 and 1998 we implanted 318 total hip replacements (THRs) in 287 patients using the Plasmacup (B. Braun Ltd, Sheffield, United Kingdom) and a conventional metal-on-polyethylene articulation. The main indications for THR were primary or secondary osteoarthritis. At follow-up after a mean 11.6 years (7.6 to 18.4) 17 patients had died and 20 could not be traced leaving a final series of 280 THRs in 250 patients. There were 62 revisions (22.1%) in 59 patients. A total of 43 acetabular shells (15.4%) had been revised and 13 (4.6%) had undergone exchange of the liner. The most frequent indications for revision were osteolysis and aseptic loosening, followed by polyethylene wear. The mean Kaplan-Meier survival of the Plasmacup was 91% at ten years and 58% at 14 years. Osteolysis was found around 36 (17.1%) of the 211 surviving shells. The median annual rate of linear wear in the surviving shells was 0.12 mm/year and 0.25 mm/year in those which had been revised (p <
0.001). Polyethylene wear was a strong independent risk factor for osteolysis and aseptic loosening. The percentage of patients with osteolysis increased proportionately with each quintile of wear-rate. There is a high late rate of failure of the Plasmacup. Patients with the combination of this prosthesis and bearing should be closely monitored after ten years.
We describe the application of a non-invasive extendible endoprosthetic replacement in skeletally-mature patients undergoing revision for failed joint replacement with resultant limb-length inequality after malignant or non-malignant disease. This prosthesis was developed for tumour surgery in skeletally-immature patients but has now been adapted for use in revision procedures to reconstruct the joint or facilitate an arthrodesis, replace bony defects and allow limb length to be restored gradually in the post-operative period. We record the short-term results in nine patients who have had this procedure after multiple previous reconstructive operations. In six, the initial reconstruction had been performed with either allograft or endoprosthetic replacement for neoplastic disease and in three for non-neoplastic disease. The essential components of the prosthesis are a magnetic disc, a gearbox and a drive screw which allows painless lengthening of the prosthesis using the principle of electromagnetic induction. The mean age of the patients was 37 years (18 to 68) with a mean follow-up of 34 months (12 to 62). They had previously undergone a mean of six (2 to 14) open procedures on the affected limb before revision with the non-invasive extendible endoprosthesis. The mean length gained was 56 mm (19 to 107) requiring a mean of nine (3 to 20) lengthening episodes performed in the outpatient department. There was one case of recurrent infection after revision of a previously infected implant and one fracture of the prosthesis after a fall. No amputations were performed. Planned exchange of the prosthesis was required in three patients after attainment of the maximum lengthening capacity of the implant. There was no failure of the lengthening mechanism. The Mean Musculoskeletal Tumour Society rating score was 22 of 30 available points (18 to 28). The use of a non-invasive extendible endoprosthesis in this manner provided patients with good functional results and restoration of leg-length equality, without the need for multiple open lengthening procedures.
