Aims. Histology is widely used for diagnosis of persistent infection during reimplantation in two-stage revision hip and knee arthroplasty, although data on its utility remain scarce. Therefore, this study aims to assess the predictive value of permanent sections at reimplantation in relation to reinfection risk, and to compare results of permanent and frozen sections. Methods. We retrospectively collected data from 226 patients (90 hips, 136 knees) with periprosthetic joint infection who underwent two-stage revision between August 2011 and September 2021, with a minimum follow-up of one year. Histology was assessed via the SLIM classification. First, we analyzed whether patients with positive permanent sections at reimplantation had higher reinfection rates than patients with negative histology. Further, we compared permanent and frozen section results, and assessed the influence of anatomical regions (knee versus hip), low- versus high-grade infections, as well as first revision versus multiple prior revisions on the histological result at reimplantation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), chi-squared tests, and Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated. Results. Overall, the reinfection rate was 18%. A total of 14 out of 82 patients (17%) with positive permanent sections at reimplantation experienced reinfection, compared to 26 of 144 patients (18%) with negative results (p = 0.996). Neither permanent sections nor fresh frozen sections were significantly associated with reinfection, with a sensitivity of 0.35, specificity of 0.63, PPV of 0.17, NPV of 0.81, and accuracy of 58%. Histology was not significantly associated with reinfection or survival time for any of the analyzed sub-groups. Permanent and frozen section results were in agreement for 91% of cases. Conclusion. Permanent and fresh frozen sections at reimplantation in two-stage revision do not serve as a reliable predictor for reinfection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):372–379

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.

Aims

This study aimed to investigate the estimated change in primary and revision arthroplasty rate in the Netherlands and Denmark for hips, knees, and shoulders during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 (COVID-period). Additional points of focus included the comparison of patient characteristics and hospital type (2019 vs COVID-period), and the estimated loss of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and impact on waiting lists.

Aims. The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-sectional, observational cohort study of patients presenting for revision of a total hip, or total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, to understand current routes to revision surgery and explore differences in symptoms, healthcare use, reason for revision, and the revision surgery (surgical time, components, length of stay) between patients having regular follow-up and those without. Methods. Data were collected from participants and medical records for the 12 months prior to revision. Patients with previous revision, metal-on-metal articulations, or hip hemiarthroplasty were excluded. Participants were retrospectively classified as ‘Planned’ or ‘Unplanned’ revision. Multilevel regression and propensity score matching were used to compare the two groups. Results. Data were analyzed from 568 patients, recruited in 38 UK secondary care sites between October 2017 and October 2018 (43.5% male; mean (SD) age 71.86 years (9.93); 305 hips, 263 knees). No significant inclusion differences were identified between the two groups. For hip revision, time to revision > ten years (odds ratio (OR) 3.804, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.353 to 10.694), p = 0.011), periprosthetic fracture (OR 20.309, 95% CI (4.574 to 90.179), p < 0.001), and dislocation (OR 12.953, 95% CI (4.014 to 41.794), p < 0.001), were associated with unplanned revision. For knee, there were no associations with route to revision. Revision after ten years was more likely for those who were younger at primary surgery, regardless of route to revision. No significant differences in cost outcomes, length of surgery time, and access to a health professional in the year prior to revision were found between the two groups. When periprosthetic fractures, dislocations, and infections were excluded, healthcare use was significantly higher in the unplanned revision group. Conclusion. Differences between characteristics for patients presenting for planned and unplanned revision are minimal. Although there was greater healthcare use in those having unplanned revision, it appears unlikely that routine orthopaedic review would have detected many of these issues. It may be safe to disinvest in standard follow-up provided there is rapid access to orthopaedic review. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):59–67

Aims

To investigate whether chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with the risk of all-cause revision or revision due to a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary hip or knee arthroplasty.

Aims

Positive cultures are not uncommon in cases of revision total knee and hip arthroplasty (TKA and THA) for presumed aseptic causes. The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence of positive intra-operative cultures in presumed aseptic revision of TKA and THA, and to determine whether the presence of intra-operative positive cultures results in inferior survival in such cases.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are recognised and proven interventions for patients with advanced arthritis. Studies to date have demonstrated a steady increase in the requirement for primary and revision procedures. Projected estimates made for the United States show that by 2030 the demand for primary TKA will grow by 673% and for revision TKA by 601% from the level in 2005. For THA the projected estimates are 174% and 137% for primary and revision surgery, respectively. The purpose of this study was to see if those predictions were similar for England and Wales using data from the National Joint Registry and the Office of National Statistics. . Analysis of data for England and Wales suggest that by 2030, the volume of primary and revision TKAs will have increased by 117% and 332%, respectively between 2012 and 2030. The data for the United States translates to a 306% cumulative rate of increase between 2012 and 2030 for revision surgery, which is similar to our predictions for England and Wales. . The predictions from the United States for primary TKA were similar to our upper limit projections. For THA, we predicted an increase of 134% and 31% for primary and revision hip surgery, respectively. Our model has limitations, however, it highlights the economic burden of arthroplasty in the future in England and Wales as a real and unaddressed problem. This will have significant implications for the provision of health care and the management of orthopaedic services in the future. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1076–1081

We compared the length of hospitalisation, rate of infection, dislocation of the hip and revision, and mortality following primary hip and knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (n = 1064) and a matched control group (n = 3192). The data were collected from nationwide Finnish health registers. Patients with Alzheimer’s disease had a longer peri-operative hospitalisation (median 13 days vs eight days, p < 0.001) and an increased risk for hip revision with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.76 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 3.00). Dislocation was the leading indication for revision. There was no difference in the rates of infection, dislocation of the hip, knee revision and short-term mortality. In long-term follow-up, patients with Alzheimer’s disease had a higher mortality (HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.70), and only one third survived ten years post-operatively. Increased age and comorbidity were associated with longer peri-operative hospitalisation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:654–61

Peri-prosthetic fracture after joint replacement in the lower limb is associated with significant morbidity. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) over a ten-year period using a population-based linked dataset.

Between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 2008, 52 136 primary THRs, 8726 revision THRs, 44 511 primary TKRs, and 3222 revision TKRs were performed. Five years post-operatively, the rate of fracture was 0.9% after primary THR, 4.2% after revision THR, 0.6% after primary TKR and 1.7% after revision TKR. Comparison of survival analysis for all primary and revision arthroplasties showed peri-prosthetic fractures were more likely in females, patients aged > 70 and after revision arthroplasty.

Female patients aged > 70 should be warned of a significantly increased risk of peri-prosthetic fracture after hip or knee replacement. The use of adjuvant medical treatment to reduce the effect of peri-prosthetic osteoporosis may be a direction of research for these patients.

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.

This prospective study evaluates the role of new laboratory markers in the diagnosis of deep implant infection in 78 patients (41 men and 37 women) with a revision total knee or hip replacement.

The mean age at the time of operation was 64.0 years (19 to 90). Intra-operative cultures showed that 21 patients had a septic and 57 an aseptic total joint replacement. The white blood cell count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate and levels of C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, procalcitonin and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α were measured in blood samples before operation. The diagnostic cut-off values were determined by Received Operating Characteristic curve analysis.

C-reactive protein (> 3.2 md/dl) and interleukin-6 (> 12 pg/ml) have the highest sensitivity (0.95). Interleukin-6 is less specific than C-reactive protein (0.87 vs 0.96). Combining C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 identifies all patients with deep infection of the implant. Procalcitonin (> 0.3 ng/ml) and TNF-α (> 40 ng/ml) are very specific (0.98 vs 0.94) but have a low sensitivity (0.33 vs 0.43).

The combination of C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 measurement provide excellent screening tests for infection of a deep implant. A highly specific marker such as procalcitonin and pre-operative aspiration of the joint might be useful in identifying patients with true positive C-reactive protein and/or interleukin-6 levels.

We wished to estimate the incidence of surgical-site infection (SSI) after total hip replacement (THR) and hemiarthroplasty and its strength of association with major risk factors. The SSI surveillance service prospectively gathered clinical, operative and infection data on inpatients from 102 hospitals in England during a four-year period.

The overall incidence of SSI was 2.23% for 16 291 THRs, 4.97% for 5769 hemiarthroplasty procedures, 3.68% for 2550 revision THRs and 7.6% for 198 revision hemiarthroplasties. Staphylococcus aureus was identified in 50% of SSIs; 59% of these isolates were methicillin-resistant (MRSA). In the single variable analysis of THRs, age, female gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, body mass index, trauma, duration of operation and pre-operative stay were significantly associated with the risk of SSI (p < 0.05). For hemiarthroplasty, the ASA score and age were significant factors. In revision THRs male gender, ASA score, trauma, wound class, duration of operation and pre-operative stay were significant risk factors. The median time to detection of SSI was eight days for superficial incisional, 11 days for deep incisional and 11 days for joint/bone infections. For each procedure the mean length of stay doubled for patients with SSI. The multivariate analysis identified age group, trauma, duration of operation and ASA score as significant, independent risk factors for SSI. There was significant interhospital variation in the rates of SSI. MRSA was the most common pathogen to cause SSI in hip arthroplasty, especially in patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty, but coagulase-negative Staph. aureus may be more important in deep infections involving the joint.

We have reviewed 65 bipolar arthroplasties of the hip in 55 patients with osteoarthritis secondary to dysplasia. The mean age at operation was 56 years (42 to 79) and the mean period of follow-up was 7.2 years (5.0 to 13.0). The average Merle d’Aubigné and Postel score before operation was 10.3 and at final follow-up 15.0. There were excellent or good results in 42 hips (65%). Migration of the outer head was observed in 50 hips (77%), most often in the group with a centre-edge angle of less than 0°, an acetabular head index of less than 60%, coverage of the outer head by the original acetabulum of less than +10° and after bone grafting of the acetabulum. This migration was progressive in 31 (62%) of the 50 hips, with massive osteolysis of the acetabulum in eight. The extent and progression of migration were closely associated with this osteolysis. Four hips required revision for extensive migration of the outer head with destruction of the acetabulum or severe acetabular osteolysis, and nine hips are awaiting revision for failure of the bipolar prosthetic head. The overall failure rate was 18%. We report major problems after bipolar hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis secondary to hip dysplasia with progressive migration of the outer head and massive acetabular osteolysis at five years or more after operation