Aims. We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of OpenPose, a posture estimation algorithm, for measurement of knee range of motion after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), in comparison to radiography and goniometry. Methods. In this prospective observational study, we analyzed 35 primary TKAs (24 patients) for knee osteoarthritis. We measured the knee angles in flexion and extension using OpenPose, radiography, and goniometry. We assessed the test-retest reliability of each method using intraclass correlation coefficient (1,1). We evaluated the ability to estimate other measurement values from the OpenPose value using linear regression analysis. We used intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) and Bland–Altman analyses to evaluate the agreement and error between radiography and the other measurements. Results. OpenPose had excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (1,1) = 1.000). The R. 2. of all regression models indicated large correlations (0.747 to 0.927). In the flexion position, the intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) of OpenPose indicated excellent agreement (0.953) with radiography. In the extension position, the intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) indicated good agreement of OpenPose and radiography (0.815) and moderate agreement of goniometry with radiography (0.593). OpenPose had no systematic error in the flexion position, and a 2.3° fixed error in the extension position, compared to radiography. Conclusion. OpenPose is a reliable and valid tool for measuring flexion and extension positions after TKA. It has better accuracy than goniometry, especially in the extension position. Accurate measurement values can be obtained with low error, high reproducibility, and no contact, independent of the examiner’s skills. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(5):313–320

Aims. To explore the clinical efficacy of using two different types of articulating spacers in two-stage revision for chronic knee periprosthetic joint infection (kPJI). Methods. A retrospective cohort study of 50 chronic kPJI patients treated with two types of articulating spacers between January 2014 and March 2022 was conducted. The clinical outcomes and functional status of the different articulating spacers were compared. Overall, 17 patients were treated with prosthetic spacers (prosthetic group (PG)), and 33 patients were treated with cement spacers (cement group (CG)). The CG had a longer mean follow-up period (46.67 months (SD 26.61)) than the PG (24.82 months (SD 16.46); p = 0.001). Results. Infection was eradicated in 45 patients overall (90%). The PG had a better knee range of motion (ROM) and Knee Society Score (KSS) after the first-stage revision (p = 0.004; p = 0.002), while both groups had similar ROMs and KSSs at the last follow-up (p = 0.136; p = 0.895). The KSS in the CG was significantly better at the last follow-up (p = 0.013), while a larger percentage (10 in 17, 58.82%) of patients in the PG chose to retain the spacer (p = 0.008). Conclusion. Prosthetic spacers and cement spacers are both effective at treating chronic kPJI because they encourage infection control, and the former improved knee function status between stages. For some patients, prosthetic spacers may not require reimplantation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(6):306–314

Aims

As has been shown in larger animal models, knee immobilization can lead to arthrofibrotic phenotypes. Our study included 168 C57BL/6J female mice, with 24 serving as controls, and 144 undergoing a knee procedure to induce a contracture without osteoarthritis (OA).