This study evaluates the association between consultant and hospital volume and the risk of re-revision and 90-day mortality following first-time revision of primary hip arthroplasty for aseptic loosening. We conducted a cohort study of first-time, single-stage revision hip arthroplasties (RHAs) performed for aseptic loosening and recorded in the National Joint Registry (NJR) data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man between 2003 and 2019. Patient identifiers were used to link records to national mortality data, and to NJR data to identify subsequent re-revision procedures. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models with restricted cubic splines were used to define associations between volume and outcome.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and bias evaluation of the current literature to create an overview of risk factors for re-revision following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). A systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase was completed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The studies were required to include a population of index rTKAs. Primary or secondary outcomes had to be re-revision. The association between preoperative factors and the effect on the risk for re-revision was also required to be reported by the studies.Aims
Methods
Spinopelvic pathology increases the risk for instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA), yet few studies have evaluated how pathology varies with age or sex. The aims of this study were: 1) to report differences in spinopelvic parameters with advancing age and between the sexes; and 2) to determine variation in the prevalence of THA instability risk factors with advancing age. A multicentre database with preoperative imaging for 15,830 THA patients was reviewed. Spinopelvic parameter measurements were made by experienced engineers, including anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPT), spinopelvic tilt (SPT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic incidence (PI). Lumbar flexion (LF), sagittal spinal deformity, and hip user index (HUI) were calculated using parameter measurements.Aims
Methods
Aims. Isolated acetabular liner exchange with a highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) component is an option to address polyethylene wear and osteolysis following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the presence of a well-fixed acetabular shell. The liner can be fixed either with the original locking mechanism or by being cemented within the acetabular component. Whether the method used for fixation of the HXLPE liner has any bearing on the long-term outcomes is still unclear. Methods. Data were retrieved for all patients who underwent isolated acetabular component liner exchange surgery with a HXLPE component in our institute between August 2000 and January 2015. Patients were classified according to the fixation method used (original locking mechanism (n = 36) or cemented (n = 50)). Survival and revision rates were compared. A total of 86 revisions were performed and the mean duration of follow-up was 13 years. Results. A total of 20 patients (23.3%) had complications, with dislocation alone being the most common (8.1%; 7/86). Ten patients (11.6%) required
Aims. Instability is a common indication for revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, even after the initial revision, some patients continue to have recurrent dislocation. The aim of this study was to assess the risk for recurrent dislocation after revision THA for instability. Methods. Between 2009 and 2019, 163 patients underwent revision THA for instability at Stanford University Medical Center. Of these, 33 (20.2%) required re-revision due to recurrent dislocation. Cox proportional hazard models, with death and
United Classification System (UCS) B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures in total hip arthroplasties (THAs) have been commonly managed with modular tapered stems. No study has evaluated the use of monoblock fluted tapered titanium stems for this indication. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a monoblock stems on implant survivorship, postoperative outcomes, radiological outcomes, and osseointegration following treatment of THA UCS B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures. A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent revision THA (rTHA) for periprosthetic UCS B2 and B3 periprosthetic fracture who received a single design monoblock fluted tapered titanium stem at two large, tertiary care, academic hospitals. A total of 72 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria (68 UCS B2, and four UCS B3 fractures). Primary outcomes of interest were radiological stem subsidence (> 5 mm), radiological osseointegration, and fracture union. Sub-analysis was also done for 46 patients with minimum one-year follow-up.Aims
Methods
Aims. Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) are complex procedures with higher rates of re-revision, complications, and mortality compared to primary TKA and THA. We report the effects of the establishment of a revision arthroplasty network (the East Midlands Specialist Orthopaedic Network; EMSON) on outcomes of rTKA and rTHA. Methods. The revision arthroplasty network was established in January 2015 and covered five hospitals in the Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire areas of the East Midlands of England. This comprises a collaborative weekly multidisciplinary meeting where upcoming rTKA and rTHA procedures are discussed, and a plan agreed. Using the Hospital Episode Statistics database, revision procedures carried out between April 2011 and March 2018 (allowing two-year follow-up) from the five network hospitals were compared to all other hospitals in England. Age, sex, and mean Hospital Frailty Risk scores were used as covariates. The primary outcome was
Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised. This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups.Aims
Methods
We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage and single-stage revision surgeries among patients with infected primary hip arthroplasty. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary arthroplasty revised with single-stage or two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014 were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HRs) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies.Aims
Methods
Revision rates for ankle arthroplasties are higher than hip or knee arthroplasties. When a total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) fails, it can either undergo revision to another ankle replacement, revision of the TAA to ankle arthrodesis (fusion), or amputation. Currently there is a paucity of literature on the outcomes of these revisions. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the outcomes of revision TAA with respect to surgery type, functional outcomes, and reoperations. A systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Cochrane reviews were searched for relevant papers. Papers analyzing surgical treatment for failed ankle arthroplasties were included. All papers were reviewed by two authors. Overall, 34 papers met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of all primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and their subsequent revision procedures in patients aged under 50 years performed at our institution. All 1,049 primary THAs which were undertaken in 860 patients aged under 50 years between 1988 and 2018 in our tertiary care institution were included. We used cemented implants in both primary and revision surgery. Impaction bone grafting was used in patients with acetabular or femoral bone defects. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to determine the survival of primary and revision THA with the endpoint of revision for any reason, and of revision for aseptic loosening.Aims
Methods
One-stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has several advantages; however, resection of the proximal femur might be necessary to achieve higher success rates. We investigated the risk factors for resection and re-revisions, and assessed complications and subsequent re-revisions. In this single-centre, case-control study, 57 patients who underwent one-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI of the hip and required resection of the proximal femur between 2009 and 2018 were identified. The control group consisted of 57 patients undergoing one-stage revision without bony resection. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify any correlation with resection and the risk factors for re-revisions. Rates of all-causes re-revision, reinfection, and instability were compared between groups.Aims
Methods
To determine if primary cemented acetabular component geometry (long posterior wall (LPW), hooded, or offset reorientating) influences the risk of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for instability or loosening. The National Joint Registry (NJR) dataset was analyzed for primary THAs performed between 2003 and 2017. A cohort of 224,874 cemented acetabular components were included. The effect of acetabular component geometry on the risk of revision for instability or for loosening was investigated using log-binomial regression adjusting for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, indication, side, institution type, operating surgeon grade, surgical approach, polyethylene crosslinking, and prosthetic head size. A competing risk survival analysis was performed with the competing risks being revision for other indications or death.Aims
Methods
Proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacements (PFEPRs) are the most common reconstruction option for osseous defects following primary and metastatic tumour resection. This study aimed to compare the rate of implant failure between PFEPRs with monopolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasties and acetabular arthroplasties, and determine the optimum articulation for revision PFEPRs. This is a retrospective review of 233 patients who underwent PFEPR. The mean age was 54.7 years (SD 18.2), and 99 (42.5%) were male. There were 90 patients with primary bone tumours (38.6%), 122 with metastatic bone disease (52.4%), and 21 with haematological malignancy (9.0%). A total of 128 patients had monopolar (54.9%), 74 had bipolar hemiarthroplasty heads (31.8%), and 31 underwent acetabular arthroplasty (13.3%).Aims
Methods
The main advantage of 3D-printed, off-the-shelf acetabular implants is the potential to promote enhanced bony fixation due to their controllable porous structure. In this study we investigated the extent of osseointegration in retrieved 3D-printed acetabular implants. We compared two groups, one made via 3D-printing (n = 7) and the other using conventional techniques (n = 7). We collected implant details, type of surgery and removal technique, patient demographics, and clinical history. Bone integration was assessed by macroscopic visual analysis, followed by sectioning to allow undecalcified histology on eight sections (~200 µm) for each implant. The outcome measures considered were area of bone attachment (%), extent of bone ingrowth (%), bone-implant contact (%), and depth of ingrowth (%), and these were quantified using a line-intercept method.Aims
Methods
The prevalence of ipsilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is rising in concert with life expectancy, putting more patients at risk for interprosthetic femur fractures (IPFFs). Our study aimed to assess treatment methodologies, implant survivorship, and IPFF clinical outcomes. A total of 76 patients treated for an IPFF from February 1985 to April 2018 were reviewed. Prior to fracture, at the hip/knee sites respectively, 46 femora had primary/primary, 21 had revision/primary, three had primary/revision, and six had revision/revision components. Mean age and BMI were 74 years (33 to 99) and 30 kg/m2 (21 to 46), respectively. Mean follow-up after fracture treatment was seven years (2 to 24).Aims
Methods
Aims. Bone stock restoration of acetabular bone defects using impaction bone grafting (IBG) in total hip arthroplasty may facilitate future re-revision in the event of failure of the reconstruction. We hypothesized that the acetabular bone defect during
Removal of infected components and culture-directed antibiotics are important for the successful treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 27% of chronic PJI patients yield negative culture results. Although culture negativity has been thought of as a contraindication to one-stage revision, data supporting this assertion are limited. The aim of our study was to report on the clinical outcomes for one-stage and two-stage exchange arthroplasty performed in patients with chronic culture-negative PJI. A total of 105 consecutive patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI were retrospectively evaluated. One-stage revision arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, while 75 patients underwent two-stage exchange, with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Reinfection, re-revision for septic and aseptic reasons, amputation, readmission, mortality, and length of stay were compared between the two treatment strategies.Aims
Methods
Aims. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is typically indicated for young and active patients. Due to the longevity of arthroplasty, these patients are likely to undergo revision surgery during their lifetime. There is a paucity of information on the long-term outcome of revision surgeries performed after failed HRA. The aim of our study was to provide survivorship data as well as clinical scores after HRA revisions. Methods. A total of 42 patients (43 hips) were revised after HRA at our centre to a variety of devices, including four HRA and 39 total hip arthroplasties (THAs). In addition to perioperative complications, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) hip scores and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12) quality of life scores were collected at follow-up visits after the primary HRA and after revision surgery. Results. The mean follow-up time after revision surgery was 8.3 years (0.3 to 19.1). The mean UCLA pain and function scores post-revision were comparable with the best scores achieved by the patients after the index HRA, but UCLA activity scores were lower after revision. SF-12 physical component scores were comparable between timepoints, but the mental component score decreased after revision. Six patients underwent unilateral
Femoral revision component subsidence has been identified as predicting early failure in revision hip surgery. This comparative cohort study assessed the potential risk factors of subsidence in two commonly used femoral implant designs. A comparative cohort study was undertaken, analyzing a consecutive series of patients following revision total hip arthroplasties using either a tapered-modular (TM) fluted titanium or a porous-coated cylindrical modular (PCM) titanium femoral component, between April 2006 and May 2018. Clinical and radiological assessment was compared for both treatment cohorts. Risk factors for subsidence were assessed and compared.Aims
Methods
Aseptic loosening of the tibial component is a frequent cause of failure in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Management options include an isolated tibial revision or full component revision. A full component revision is frequently selected by surgeons unfamiliar with the existing implant or who simply wish to “start again”. This option adds morbidity compared with an isolated tibial revision. While isolated tibial revision has a lower morbidity, it is technically more challenging due to difficulties with exposure and maintaining prosthetic stability. This study was designed to compare these two reconstructive options. Patients undergoing revision TKA for isolated aseptic tibial loosening between 2012 and 2017 were identified. Those with revision implants or revised for infection, instability, osteolysis, or femoral component loosening were excluded. A total of 164 patients were included; 88 had an isolated tibial revision and 76 had revision of both components despite only having a loose tibial component. The demographics and clinical and radiological outcomes were recorded.Aims
Methods
Studying the indications for revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) may enable surgeons to change their practice during the initial procedure, thereby reducing the need for revision surgery. The aim of this study was to identify and describe the potentially avoidable indications for revision THA within five years of the initial procedure. A retrospective review of 117 patients (73 women, 44 men; mean age 61.5 years (27 to 88)) who met the inclusion criteria was conducted. Three adult reconstruction surgeons independently reviewed the radiographs and medical records, and they classified the revision THAs into two categories: potentially avoidable and unavoidable. Baseline demographics, perioperative details, and quality outcomes up to the last follow-up were recorded.Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of this study was to identify predictors of return to
work (RTW) after revision lower limb arthroplasty in patients of
working age in the United Kingdom. We assessed 55 patients aged ≤ 65 years after revision total
hip arthroplasty (THA). There were 43 women and 12 men with a mean
age of 54 years (23 to 65). We also reviewed 30 patients after revision
total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There were 14 women and 16 men with
a mean age of 58 years (48 to 64). Preoperatively, age, gender,
body mass index, social deprivation, mode of failure, length of
primary implant survival, work status and nature, activity level
(University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score), and Oxford
Hip and Knee Scores were recorded. Postoperatively, RTW status,
Oxford Hip and Knee Scores, EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), UCLA score, and
Work, Osteoarthritis and Joint-Replacement Questionnaire (WORQ)
scores were obtained. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed.Aims
Patients and Methods
The advent of trabecular metal (TM) augments has revolutionized
the management of severe bone defects during acetabular reconstruction.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients undergoing revision
total hip arthroplasty (THA) with the use of TM augments for reconstruction
of Paprosky IIIA and IIIB defects. A retrospective study was conducted at four centres between August
2008 and January 2015. Patients treated with TM augments and TM
shell for a Paprosky grade IIIA or IIIB defect, in the absence of
pelvic discontinuity, and who underwent revision hip arthroplasty
with the use of TM augments were included in the study. A total
of 41 patients with minimum follow-up of two years were included
and evaluated using intention-to-treat analysis.Aims
Patients and Methods
In order to address acetabular defects, porous metal revision acetabular components and augments have been developed, which require fixation to each other. The fixation technique that results in the smallest relative movement between the components, as well as its influence on the primary stability with the host bone, have not previously been determined. A total of 18 composite hemipelvises with a Paprosky IIB defect were implanted using a porous titanium 56 mm multihole acetabular component and 1 cm augment. Each acetabular component and augment was affixed to the bone using two screws, while the method of fixation between the acetabular component and augment varied for the three groups of six hemipelvises: group S, screw fixation only; group SC, screw plus cement fixation; group C, cement fixation only. The implanted hemipelvises were cyclically loaded to three different loading maxima (0.5 kN, 0.9 kN, and 1.8 kN).Objectives
Methods
Little is known about the relative outcomes of revision of unicompartmental
knee arthroplasty (UKA) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO) to total
knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study is to compare the
outcomes of revision surgery for the two procedures in terms of
complications, re-revision and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)
at a minimum of two years follow-up. This study was a retrospective review of data from an institutional
arthroplasty registry for cases performed between 2001 and 2014.
A total of 292 patients were identified, of which 217 had a revision
of HTO to TKA, and 75 had revision of UKA to TKA. While mean follow-up
was longer for the HTO group compared with the UKA group, patient
demographics (age, body mass index and Charlson co-morbidity index)
and PROMs (Short Form-36, Oxford Knee Score, Knee Society Score,
both objective and functional) were similar in the two groups prior
to revision surgery. Outcomes included the rate of complications
and
re-operation, PROMS and patient-reported satisfaction at six months
and two years post-operatively. We also compared the duration of
surgery and the need for revision implants in the two groups. Aims
Patients and Methods
Aims. To determine the outcomes following revision surgery of metal-on-metal
hip arthroplasties (MoMHA) performed for adverse reactions to metal
debris (ARMD), and to identify factors predictive of re-revision. Patients and Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study using National
Joint Registry (NJR) data on 2535 MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery
for ARMD between 2008 and 2014. The outcomes studied following revision were
intra-operative complications, mortality and
Objectives. Few studies have assessed outcomes following non-metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty (non-MoMHA) revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD). We assessed outcomes following non-MoMHA revision surgery performed for ARMD, and identified predictors of re-revision. Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. All non-MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery for ARMD between 2008 and 2014 were included (185 hips in 185 patients). Outcome measures following ARMD revision were intra-operative complications, mortality and
We used the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man (NJR) to investigate the risk of revision due to prosthetic joint infection (PJI) for patients undergoing primary and revision hip arthroplasty, the changes in risk over time, and the overall burden created by PJI. We analysed revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed due to a diagnosis of PJI and the linked index procedures recorded in the NJR between 2003 and 2014. The cohort analysed consisted of 623 253 index primary hip arthroplasties, 63 222 index revision hip arthroplasties and 7585 revision THAs performed due to a diagnosis of PJI. The prevalence, cumulative incidence functions and the burden of PJI (total procedures) were calculated. Overall linear trends were investigated with log-linear regression.Objectives
Methods
This study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of radiographic
criteria to detect aseptic acetabular loosening after revision total
hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aims were to determine the predictive
values of different thresholds of migration and to determine the
predictive values of radiolucency criteria. Acetabular component migration to re-revision was measured retrospectively
using Ein-Bild-Rontgen-Analyse (EBRA-Cup) and manual measurements
(Sutherland method) in two groups: Group A, 52 components (48 patients) found
not loose at re-revision and Group B, 42 components (36 patients)
found loose at re-revision between 1980 and 2015. The presence and
extent of radiolucent lines was also assessed.Aims
Patients and Methods
We present a case series of ten metal-on-polyethylene total hip
arthroplasties (MoP THAs) with delayed dislocation associated with
unrecognised adverse local tissue reaction due to corrosion at the
trunnion and pseudotumour formation. The diagnosis was not suspected in nine of the ten patients (six
female/four male; mean age 66 years), despite treatment in a specialist
unit (mean time from index surgery to revision was 58 months, 36
to 84). It was identified at revision surgery and subsequently confirmed
by histological examination of resected tissue. Pre-operative assessment
and culture results ruled out infection. A variety of treatment
strategies were used, including resection of the pseudotumour and
efforts to avoid recurrent dislocation. Aims
Methods
The June 2015 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup. 360 . looks at: neuraxial anaesthesia and large joint arthroplasty; revision total hip arthoplasty: factors associated with
We undertook a retrospective cohort study to
determine clinical outcomes following the revision of metal-on-metal (MoM)
hip replacements for adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD), and
to identify predictors of time to revision and outcomes following
revision. Between 1998 and 2012 a total of 64 MoM hips (mean age
at revision of 57.8 years; 46 (72%) female; 46 (72%) hip resurfacings
and 18 (28%) total hip replacements) were revised for ARMD at one specialist
centre. At a mean follow-up of 4.5 years (1.0 to 14.6) from revision
for ARMD there were 13 hips (20.3%) with post-operative complications
and eight (12.5%) requiring re-revision. The Kaplan–Meier five-year survival rate for ARMD revision was
87.9% (95% confidence interval 78.9 to 98.0; 19 hips at risk). Excluding
re-revisions, the median absolute Oxford hip score (OHS) following
ARMD revision using the percentage method (0% best outcome and 100%
worst outcome) was 18.8% (interquartile range (IQR) 7.8% to 48.3%),
which is equivalent to 39/48 (IQR 24.8/48 to 44.3/48) when using
the modified OHS. Histopathological response did not affect time
to revision for ARMD (p = 0.334) or the subsequent risk of re-revision
(p = 0.879). Similarly, the presence or absence of a contralateral
MoM hip bearing did not affect time to revision for ARMD (p = 0.066)
or the subsequent risk of re-revision (p = 0.178). Patients revised to MoM bearings had higher rates of re-revision
(five of 16 MoM hips re-revised; p = 0.046), but those not requiring
re-revision had good functional results (median absolute OHS 14.6%
or 41.0/48). Short-term morbidity following revision for ARMD was
comparable with previous reports. Caution should be exercised when choosing
bearing surfaces for ARMD revisions. Cite this article:
We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients
(50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous
revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised
allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of
the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with
allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely
assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision
and
