The Unified Classification System (UCS) was introduced
because of a growing need to have a standardised universal classification
system of periprosthetic fractures. It combines and simplifies many
existing classification systems, and can be applied to any fracture
around any partial or total joint replacement occurring during or
after operation. Our goal was to assess the inter- and intra-observer
reliability of the UCS in association with knee replacement when
classifying fractures affecting one or more of the femur, tibia
or patella. We used an international panel of ten orthopaedic surgeons with
subspecialty fellowship training and expertise in adult hip and
knee reconstruction (‘experts’) and ten residents of orthopaedic
surgery in the last two years of training (‘pre-experts’). They
each received 15 radiographs for evaluation. After six weeks they
evaluated the same radiographs again but in a different order. The reliability was assessed using the Kappa and weighted Kappa
values. The Kappa values for inter-observer reliability for the experts
and the pre-experts were 0.741 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.707
to 0.774) and 0.765 (95% CI 0.733 to 0.797), respectively. The weighted
Kappa values for intra-observer reliability for the experts and
pre-experts were 0.898 (95% CI 0.846 to 0.950) and 0.878 (95% CI
0.815 to 0.942) respectively. The UCS has substantial inter-observer reliability and ‘near
perfect’ intra-observer reliability when used for periprosthetic
fractures in association with knee replacement in the hands of experienced
and inexperienced users. Cite this article:
This study aimed to evaluate whether an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) for arthroplasty established during the COVID-19 pandemic at a safety net hospital can be associated with a decrease in hospital length of stay (LOS) and an increase in same-day discharges (SDDs) without increasing acute adverse events. A retrospective review of 124 consecutive primary arthroplasty procedures performed after resuming elective procedures on 11 May 2020 were compared to the previous 124 consecutive patients treated prior to 17 March 2020, at a single urban safety net hospital. Revision arthroplasty and patients with < 90-day follow-up were excluded. The primary outcome measures were hospital LOS and the number of SDDs. Secondary outcome measures included 90-day complications, 90-day readmissions, and 30day emergency department (ED) visits.Aims
Methods
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
Postoperative deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) is believed to be rare in Asians. We studied 88 consecutive patients in Malaysia who had operations for
Collateral ligament release is advocated in total
knee arthroplasty (TKA) to deal with significant coronal plane deformities,
but is also associated with significant disadvantages. We describe steps to avoid release of the collateral (superficial
medial and lateral collateral) ligaments during TKA in severely
deformed knees, while correcting deformity and balancing the knee. Cite this article:
We analysed data from the Oxford hip and knee questionnaires collected by the New Zealand Joint Registry at six months and five years after joint replacement, to determine if there was any relationship between the scores and the risk of early revision. Logistic regression of the six-month scores indicated that for every one-unit decrease in the Oxford score, the risk of revision within two years increased by 9.7% for total hip replacement (THR), 9.9% for total knee replacement (TKR) and 12.0% for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). Our findings showed that 70% of the revisions within two years for TKR and 67% for THR and UKR would have been captured by monitoring the lowest 22%, 28% and 28%, respectively, of the Oxford scores. When analysed using the Kalairajah classification a score of <
27 (poor) was associated with a risk of revision within two years of 7.6% for THR, 7.0% for TKR and 24.3% for UKR, compared with risks of 0.7%, 0.7% and 1.8%, respectively, for scores >
34 (good or excellent). Our study confirms that the Oxford hip and knee scores at six months are useful predictors of early revision after THR and TKR and we recommend their use for the monitoring of the outcome and potential failure in these patients.
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.