In a prospective multicentre study we investigated
variations in pain management used by knee arthroplasty surgeons
in order to compare the differences in pain levels among patients
undergoing total knee replacements (TKR), and to compare the effectiveness
of pain management protocols. The protocols, peri-operative levels
of pain and patient satisfaction were investigated in 424 patients
who underwent TKR in 14 hospitals. The protocols were highly variable
and peri-operative pain levels varied substantially, particularly
during the first two post-operative days. Differences in levels
of pain were greatest during the night after TKR, when visual analogue
scores ranged from 16.9 to 94.3 points. Of the methods of managing pain, the combined use of peri-articular
infiltration and nerve blocks provided better pain relief than other
methods during the first two post-operative days. Patients managed
with peri-articular injection plus nerve block, and epidural analgesia
were more likely to have higher satisfaction at two weeks after TKR.
This study highlights the need to establish a consistent pain management
strategy after TKR.
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are
increasingly being used to assess functional outcome and patient satisfaction.
They provide a framework for comparisons between surgical units,
and individual surgeons for benchmarking and financial remuneration.
Better performance may bring the reward of more customers as patients and
commissioners seek out high performers for their elective procedures.
Using National Joint Registry (NJR) data linked to PROMs we identified
22 691 primary total knee replacements (TKRs) undertaken for osteoarthritis
in England and Wales between August 2008 and February 2011, and
identified the surgical factors that influenced the improvements
in the Oxford knee score (OKS) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) assessment
using multiple regression analysis. After correction for patient
factors the only surgical factors that influenced PROMs were implant
brand and hospital type (both p <
0.001). However, the effects
of surgical factors upon the PROMs were modest compared with patient
factors. For both the OKS and the EQ-5D the most important factors
influencing the improvement in PROMs were the corresponding pre-operative
score and the patient’s general health status. Despite having only
a small effect on PROMs, this study has shown that both implant
brand and hospital type do influence reported subjective functional
scores following TKR. In the current climate of financial austerity,
proposed performance-based remuneration and wider patient choice,
it would seem unwise to ignore these effects and the influence of
a range of additional patient factors.
Tranexamic acid (TEA), an inhibitor of fibrinolysis,
reduces blood loss after routine total knee replacement (TKR). However,
controversy persists regarding the dosage and timing of administration
of this drug during surgery. We performed a prospective randomised
controlled study to examine the optimum blood-saving effect of TEA
in minimally invasive TKR. We randomly assigned 151 patients who underwent unilateral minimally
invasive TKR to three groups: 1) a placebo group (50 patients);
2) a one-dose TEA group (52 patients), who received one injection
of TEA (10 mg/kg) intra-operatively on deflation of the tourniquet;
and 3) a two-dose TEA group (49 patients), who received two injections
of TEA (10 mg/kg) given pre-operatively and intra-operatively. Total
blood loss was calculated from the maximum loss of haemoglobin.
All patients were followed clinically for the presence of venous
thromboembolism (VTE). The mean total blood loss was significantly higher in the placebo
group than in the other two groups (1222 ml (845 to 2043) Our prospective randomised controlled study showed that one intra-operative
injection of TEA is effective for blood conservation after minimally
invasive TKR.
This prospective study describes the outcome of the first 1000 phase 3 Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacements (UKRs) implanted using a minimally invasive surgical approach for the recommended indications by two surgeons and followed up independently. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years (1 to 11) with 547 knees having a minimum follow-up of five years. At five years their mean Oxford knee score was 41.3 ( The incidence of implant-related re-operations was 2.9%; of these 29 re-operations two were revisions requiring revision knee replacement components with stems and wedges, 17 were conversions to a primary total knee replacement, six were open reductions for dislocation of the bearing, three were secondary lateral UKRs and one was revision of a tibial component. The most common reason for further surgical intervention was progression of arthritis in the lateral compartment (0.9%), followed by dislocation of the bearing (0.6%) and revision for unexplained pain (0.6%). If all implant-related re-operations are considered failures, the ten-year survival rate was 96% (95% confidence interval, 92.5 to 99.5). If only revisions requiring revision components are considered failures the ten-year survival rate is 99.8% (confidence interval 99 to 100). This is the largest published series of UKRs implanted through a minimally invasive surgical approach and with ten-year survival data. The survival rates are similar to those obtained with a standard open approach whereas the function is better. This demonstrates the effectiveness and safety of a minimally invasive surgical approach for implanting the Oxford UKR.