High failure rates of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty implants have highlighted the need for more careful introduction and monitoring of new implants and for the evaluation of the safety of medical devices. The National Joint Registry and other regulatory services are unable to detect failing implants at an early enough stage. We aimed to identify validated surrogate markers of long-term outcome in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating surrogate markers for predicting long-term outcome in primary THA. Long-term outcome was defined as revision rate of an implant at ten years according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines. We conducted a search of Medline and Embase (OVID) databases. Separate search strategies were devised for the Cochrane database and Google Scholar. Each search was performed to include articles from the date of their inception to June 8, 2015.Objectives
Methods
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has
advantages over total knee arthroplasty but national joint registries report
a significantly higher revision rate for UKA. As a result, most
surgeons are highly selective, offering UKA only to a small proportion
(up to 5%) of patients requiring arthroplasty of the knee, and consequently
performing few each year. However, surgeons with large UKA practices
have the lowest rates of revision. The overall size of the practice
is often beyond the surgeon’s control, therefore case volume may
only be increased by broadening the indications for surgery, and
offering UKA to a greater proportion of patients requiring arthroplasty
of the knee. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal UKA usage
(defined as the percentage of knee arthroplasty practice comprised
by UKA) to minimise the rate of revision in a sample of 41 986 records
from the for National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR). UKA usage has a complex, non-linear relationship with the rate
of revision. Acceptable results are achieved with the use of 20%
or more. Optimal results are achieved with usage between 40% and
60%. Surgeons with the lowest usage (up to 5%) have the highest
rates of revision. With optimal usage, using the most commonly used
implant, five-year survival is 96% (95% confidence interval (CI)
94.9 to 96.0), compared with 90% (95% CI 88.4 to 91.6) with low
usage (5%) previously considered ideal. The rate of revision of UKA is highest with low usage, implying
the use of narrow, and perhaps inappropriate, indications. The widespread
use of broad indications, using appropriate implants, would give
patients the advantages of UKA, without the high rate of revision. Cite this article:
There is a large amount of evidence available
about the relative merits of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty
(UKA and TKA). Based on the same evidence, different people draw
different conclusions and as a result, there is great variability
in the usage of UKA. The revision rate of UKA is much higher than TKA and so some
surgeons conclude that UKA should not be performed. Other surgeons
believe that the main reason for the high revision rate is that
UKA is easy to revise and, therefore, the threshold for revision
is low. They also believe that UKA has many advantages over TKA
such as a faster recovery, lower morbidity and mortality and better
function. They therefore conclude that UKA should be undertaken
whenever appropriate. The solution to this argument is to minimise the revision rate
of UKA, thereby addressing the main disadvantage of UKA. The evidence
suggests that this will be achieved if surgeons use UKA for at least
20% of their knee arthroplasties and use implants that are appropriate
for these broad indications. Cite this article:
To determine ten-year failure rates following 36 mm metal-on-metal
(MoM) Pinnacle total hip arthroplasty (THA), and identify predictors
of failure. We retrospectively assessed a single-centre cohort of 569 primary
36 mm MoM Pinnacle THAs (all Corail stems) followed up since 2012
according to Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulation Agency
recommendations. All-cause failure rates (all-cause revision, and
non-revised cross-sectional imaging failures) were calculated, with predictors
for failure identified using multivariable Cox regression.Aims
Patients and Methods
To present a surgically relevant update of trunnionosis. Systematic review performed April 2017.Aims
Materials and Methods
This review examines the future of total hip arthroplasty, aiming to avoid past mistakes
The high revision rates of the DePuy Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and the DePuy ASR XL (the total hip arthroplasty (THA) version) have led to questions over the viability of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip joints. Some designs of MoM hip joint do, however, have reasonable mid-term performance when implanted in appropriate patients. Investigations into the reasons for implant failure are important to offer help with the choice of implants and direction for future implant designs. One way to assess the performance of explanted hip prostheses is to measure the wear (in terms of material loss) on the joint surfaces. In this study, a coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used to measure the wear on five failed cementless Biomet Magnum/ReCap/ Taperloc large head MoM THAs, along with one Biomet ReCap resurfacing joint. Surface roughness measurements were also taken. The reason for revision of these implants was pain and/or adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) and/or elevated blood metal ion levels.Objectives
Methods
Our aim was to report survivorship data and lessons learned with
the Corail/Pinnacle cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) system. Between August 2005 and March 2015, a total of 4802 primary cementless
Corail/Pinnacle THAs were performed in 4309 patients. In March 2016,
we reviewed these hips from a prospectively maintained database.Aims
Patients and Methods
We aimed to assess the comparability of data in joint replacement
registries and identify ways of improving the comparisons between
registries and the overall monitoring of joint replacement surgery. We conducted a review of registries that are full members of
the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries with publicly
available annual reports in English. Of the six registries which
were included, we compared the reporting of: mean age, definitions
for revision and re-operation, reasons for revision, the approach
to analysing revisions, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)
for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hip resurfacing
arthroplasty (HRA).Aims
Materials and Methods
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.
Following arthroplasty of the knee, the patient’s
perception of improvement in symptoms is fundamental to the assessment
of outcome. Better clinical outcome may offset the inferior survival
observed for some types of implant. By examining linked National
Joint Registry (NJR) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)
data, we aimed to compare PROMs collected at a minimum of six months
post-operatively for total (TKR: n = 23 393) and unicondylar knee
replacements (UKR: n = 505). Improvements in knee-specific (Oxford
knee score, OKS) and generic (EuroQol, EQ-5D) scores were compared
and adjusted for case-mix differences using multiple regression.
Whereas the improvements in the OKS and EQ-5D were significantly
greater for TKR than for UKR, once adjustments were made for case-mix
differences and pre-operative score, the improvements in the two
scores were not significantly different. The adjusted mean differences
in the improvement of OKS and EQ-5D were 0.0 (95% confidence interval (CI)
-0.9 to 0.9; p = 0.96) and 0.009 (95% CI -0.034 to 0.015; p = 0.37),
respectively. We found no difference in the improvement of either knee-specific
or general health outcomes between TKR and UKR in a large cohort
of registry patients. With concerns about significantly higher revision
rates for UKR observed in worldwide registries, we question the
widespread use of an arthroplasty that does not confer a significant
benefit in clinical outcome.
United Kingdom National Institute for Health
and Clinical Excellence guidelines recommend the use of total hip replacement
(THR) for displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck
in cognitively intact patients, who were independently mobile prior
to the injury. This study aimed to analyse the risk factors associated
with revision of the implant and mortality following THR, and to
quantify risk. National Joint Registry data recording a THR performed
for acute fracture of the femoral neck between 2003 and 2010 were
analysed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate
the extent to which risk of revision was related to specific covariates.
Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyse factors affecting
peri-operative mortality (<
90 days). A total of 4323 procedures
were studied. There were 80 patients who had undergone revision
surgery at the time of censoring (five-year revision rate 3.25%, 95%
confidence interval 2.44 to 4.07) and 137 patients (3.2%) patients
died within 90 days. After adjusting for patient and surgeon characteristics,
an increased risk of revision was associated with the use of cementless
prostheses compared with cemented (hazard ratio (HR) 1.33, p = 0.021).
Revision was independent of bearing surface and head size. The risk
of mortality within 90 days was significantly increased with higher
American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (grade 3: odds
ratio (OR) 4.04, p <
0.001; grade 4/5: OR 20.26, p <
0.001;
both compared with grades 1/2) and older age (≥ 75 years: OR 1.65,
p = 0.025), but reduced over the study period (9% relative risk reduction
per year). THR is a good option in patients aged <
75 years and with
ASA 1/2. Cementation of the femoral component does not adversely
affect peri-operative mortality but improves survival of the implant
in the mid-term when compared with cementless femoral components.
There are no benefits of using head sizes >
28 mm or bearings other
than metal-on-polyethylene. More research is required to determine
the benefits of THR over hemiarthroplasty in older patients and
those with ASA grades >
2.
Many aspects of total knee arthroplasty have
changed since its inception. Modern prosthetic design, better fixation techniques,
improved polyethylene wear characteristics and rehabilitation, have
all contributed to a large change in revision rates. Arthroplasty
patients now expect longevity of their prostheses and demand functional
improvement to match. This has led to a re-examination of the long-held
belief that mechanical alignment is instrumental to a successful
outcome and a focus on restoring healthy joint kinematics. A combination
of kinematic restoration and uncemented, adaptable fixation may
hold the key to future advances. Cite this article:
Vancomycin is commonly added to acrylic bone cement during revision
arthroplasty surgery. Proprietary cement preparations containing
vancomycin are available, but are significantly more expensive.
We investigated whether the elution of antibiotic from ‘home-made’
cement containing vancomycin was comparable with more expensive
commercially available vancomycin impregnated cement. A total of 18 cement discs containing either proprietary CopalG+V;
or ‘home-made’ CopalR+G with vancomycin added by hand, were made.
Each disc contained the same amount of antibiotic (0.5 g gentamycin,
2 g vancomycin) and was immersed in ammonium acetate buffer in a
sealed container. Fluid from each container was sampled at eight
time points over a two-week period. The concentrations of gentamicin
and vancomycin in the fluid were analysed using high performance
liquid chromatography mass spectrometry.Aims
Materials and Methods
To determine the effect of a change in design of a cementless
ceramic acetabular component in fixation and clinical outcome after
total hip arthroplasty We compared 342 hips (302 patients) operated between 1999 and
2005 with a relatively smooth hydroxyapatite coated acetabular component
(group 1), and 337 hips (310 patients) operated between 2006 and
2011 using a similar acetabular component with a macrotexture on
the entire outer surface of the component (group 2). The mean age of
the patients was 53.5 (14 to 70) in group 1 and 53.0 (15 to 70)
in group 2. The mean follow-up was 12.7 years (10 to 17) for group
1 and 7.2 years (4 to 10) for group 2.Aims
Patients and Methods