Total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are common orthopaedic procedures requiring postoperative radiographs to confirm implant positioning and identify complications. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based image analysis has the potential to automate this postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate how AI is being used in the analysis of radiographs following THA and TKA, and how accurate these tools are. The Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed libraries were systematically searched to identify relevant articles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O’Malley framework were followed. Study quality was assessed using a modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies tool. AI performance was reported using either the area under the curve (AUC) or accuracy.Aims
Methods
α-defensin is a biomarker which has been described as having
a high degree of accuracy in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint
infection (PJI). Current meta-analyses are based on the α-defensin
laboratory-based immunoassay rather than the quick on-table lateral
flow test kit. This study is the first meta-analysis to compare the
accuracy of the α-defensin laboratory-based immunoassay and the
lateral flow test kit for the diagnosis of PJI. A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred
Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
Inclusion criteria were all clinical studies where the diagnosis
of PJI was uncertain. All studies selected used the Musculoskeletal
Infection Society (MSIS) or modified MSIS criteria. Two independent
reviewers reviewed the studies and extracted data. A meta-analysis
of results was carried out: pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive
and negative likelihood ratio, heterogeneity and areas under curves
are reported.Aims
Materials and Methods
The purpose of this study was to assess early physical function
after total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA), and the correlation
between patient-reported outcome measures, physical performance
and actual physical activity (measured by actigraphy). A total of 80 patients aged 55 to 80 years undergoing THA or
TKA for osteoarthritis were included in this prospective cohort
study. The main outcome measure was change in patient reported hip
or knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS/KOOS) from
pre-operatively until post-operative day 13 (THA) or 20 (TKA). Secondary measures
were correlations to objectively assessed change in physical performance
(paced-walk, chair-stand, stair-climb tests) at day 14 (THA) or
21 (TKA) and actual physical activity (actigraphy) measured at day
12 and 13 (THA) or 19 and 20 (TKA). Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of this study was to define return to
theatre (RTT) rates for elective hip and knee replacement (HR and
KR), to describe the predictors and to show the variations in risk-adjusted
rates by surgical team and hospital using national English hospital
administrative data. We examined information on 260 206 HRs and 315 249 KRs undertaken
between April 2007 and March 2012. The 90-day RTT rates were 2.1%
for HR and 1.8% for KR. Male gender, obesity, diabetes and several
other comorbidities were associated with higher odds for both index
procedures. For HR, hip resurfacing had half the odds of cement fixation
(OR = 0.58, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.47 to 0.71). For KR,
unicondylar KR had half the odds of total replacement (OR = 0.49,
95% CI 0.42 to 0.56), and younger ages had higher odds (OR = 2.23,
95% CI 1.65 to 3.01) for ages <
40 years compared with ages 60
to 69 years). There were more funnel plot outliers at three standard deviations
than would be expected if variation occurred on a random basis. Hierarchical modelling showed that three-quarters of the variation
between surgeons for HR and over half the variation between surgeons
for KR are not explained by the hospital they operated at or by
available patient factors. We conclude that 90-day RTT rate may
be a useful quality indicator for orthopaedics. Cite this article:
We report a systematic review and meta-analysis
of the peer-reviewed literature focusing on metal sensitivity testing
in patients undergoing total joint replacement (TJR). Our purpose
was to assess the risk of developing metal hypersensitivity post-operatively
and its relationship with outcome and to investigate the advantages
of performing hypersensitivity testing. We undertook a comprehensive search of the citations quoted in
PubMed and EMBASE: 22 articles (comprising 3634 patients) met the
inclusion criteria. The frequency of positive tests increased after
TJR, especially in patients with implant failure or a metal-on-metal
coupling. The probability of developing a metal allergy was higher
post-operatively (odds ratio (OR) 1.52 (95% confidence interval
(CI) 1.06 to 2.31)), and the risk was further increased when failed
implants were compared with stable TJRs (OR 2.76 (95% CI 1.14 to
6.70)). Hypersensitivity testing was not able to discriminate between
stable and failed TJRs, as its predictive value was not statistically
proven. However, it is generally thought that hypersensitivity testing
should be performed in patients with a history of metal allergy
and in failed TJRs, especially with metal-on-metal implants and
when the cause of the loosening is doubtful.
A new generation of knee prostheses has been introduced with the intention of improving post-operative knee flexion. In order to evaluate whether this goal has been achieved we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic literature searches were conducted on MEDLINE and EMBASE from their inception to December 2007, and proceedings of scientific meetings were also searched. Only randomised, clinical trials were included in the meta-analysis. The mean difference in the maximum post-operative flexion between the ‘high-flex’ and conventional types of prosthesis was defined as the primary outcome measure. A total of five relevant articles was identified. Analysis of these trials suggested that no clinically relevant or statistically significant improvement was obtained in flexion with the ‘high-flex’ prostheses. The weighted mean difference was 2.1° (95% confidence interval −0.2 to +4.3; p = 0.07).
