Breast cancer survivors have known risk factors that might influence the results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study evaluated clinical outcomes of patients with breast cancer history after primary THA and TKA. Our total joint registry identified patients with breast cancer history undergoing primary THA (n = 423) and TKA (n = 540). Patients were matched 1:1 based upon age, sex, BMI, procedure (hip or knee), and surgical year to non-breast cancer controls. Mortality, implant survival, and complications were assessed via Kaplan-Meier methods. Clinical outcomes were evaluated via Harris Hip Scores (HHSs) or Knee Society Scores (KSSs). Mean follow-up was six years (2 to 15).Aims
Methods
The present study aimed to investigate whether patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) undergoing joint arthroplasty have a higher incidence of adverse outcomes than those without IBD. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify eligible studies reporting postoperative outcomes in IBD patients undergoing joint arthroplasty. The primary outcomes included postoperative complications, while the secondary outcomes included unplanned readmission, length of stay (LOS), joint reoperation/implant revision, and cost of care. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model when heterogeneity was substantial.Aims
Methods
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
Currently, the US Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) has been testing bundled payments for revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) through the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) programme. Under the BPCI, bundled payments for revision TJAs are defined on the basis of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). However, these DRG-based bundled payment models may not be adequate to account appropriately for the varying case-complexity seen in revision TJAs. The 2008-2014 Medicare 5% Standard Analytical Files (SAF5) were used to identify patients undergoing revision TJA under DRG codes 466, 467, or 468. Generalized linear regression models were built to assess the independent marginal cost-impact of patient, procedural, and geographic characteristics on 90-day costs.Aims
Methods
Aims
Patients and Methods
Periprosthetic fracture is a significant complication of total
hip and knee arthroplasty. This study aimed to describe the survival
of patients sustaining periprosthetic femoral fractures and compare
this with that of the general population, as well as to identify
the factors that influence survival. A total of 151 patients (women: men 116:35, mean age 74.6 years,
standard deviation 11.5) that sustained a periprosthetic fracture
between January 2005 and October 2012 were retrospectively analysed.
Epidemiological data, comorbidities, type of surgical management,
type of implant, and mortality data were studied.Aims
Patients and Methods
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:
The routine use of surgical drains in total hip arthroplasty remains controversial. They have not been shown to decrease the rate of wound infection significantly and can provide a retrograde route for it. Their use does not reduce the size or incidence of post-operative wound haematomas. This prospective, randomised study was designed to evaluate the role of drains in routine total hip arthroplasty. We investigated 552 patients (577 hips) undergoing unilateral or bilateral total hip arthroplasty who had been randomised to either having a drain for 24 hours or not having a drain. All patients followed standardised pre-, intra-, and post-operative regimes and were independently assessed using the Harris hip score before operation and at six, 18 and 36 months follow-up. The rate of superficial and deep infection was 2.9% and 0.4%, respectively, in the drained group and 4.8% and 0.7%, respectively in the undrained group. One patient in the undrained group had a haematoma which did not require drainage or transfusion. The rate of transfusion after operation in the drained group was significantly higher than for undrained procedures (p <
0.042). The use of a drain did not influence the post-operative levels of haemoglobin, the revision rates, Harris hip scores, the length of hospital stay or the incidence of thromboembolism. We conclude that drains provide no clear advantage at total hip arthroplasty, represent an additional cost, and expose patients to a higher risk of transfusion.