This is the second of a series of reviews of registries. This review looks specifically at worldwide registry data that have been collected on knee arthroplasty, what we have learned from their reports, and what the limitations are as to what we currently know.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a major orthopaedic intervention. The length of a patient's stay has been progressively reduced with the introduction of enhanced recovery protocols: day-case surgery has become the ultimate challenge.

This narrative review shows the potential limitations of day-case TKA. These constraints may be social, linked to patient’s comorbidities, or due to surgery-related adverse events (e.g. pain, post-operative nausea and vomiting, etc.).

Using patient stratification, tailored surgical techniques and multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia, day-case TKA might be achievable in a limited group of patients. The younger, male patient without comorbidities and with an excellent social network around him might be a candidate.

Demographic changes, effective recovery programmes and less invasive surgical techniques such as unicondylar knee arthroplasty, may increase the size of the group of potential day-case patients.

The cost reduction achieved by day-case TKA needs to be balanced against any increase in morbidity and mortality and the cost of advanced follow-up at a distance with new technology. These factors need to be evaluated before adopting this ultimate ‘fast-track’ approach.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):40–4.

We assessed the outcome of patients who were lost to follow-up after arthroplasty by a single surgeon. The aim was to validate the surgeon’s data set with the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry and determine the outcome of those patients lost to follow-up.

Prospective data on patient demographics, operative details and outcomes of the surgeon’s 1192 primary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) procedures were analysed. There were 69 knees in patients who were lost to follow-up, among whom the Registry identified 31 deaths and eight revisions.

The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) at seven years using the additional Registry data was 8.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 7 to 11). Using the surgeon’s data, the CPR at seven years was 8% (95% CI 6.3 to 10.1) for the best-case scenario where loss to follow-up was excluded, and 16% (95% CI 13.8 to 19.4) for the worst-case scenario, where all patients lost to follow-up were deemed to have been revised. There was a significantly higher mortality rate in those patients lost to follow-up.

This study demonstrates that a national joint registry can be used by individual surgeons to establish more accurate revision rates in their arthroplasty patients. This is expected to facilitate a more rigorous audit of surgical outcomes by surgeons and lead to more accurate and uniform reporting of the results of arthroplasty in general.

This conversation represents an attempt by several arthroplasty surgeons to critique several abstracts presented over the last year as well as to use them as a jumping off point for trying to figure out where they fit in into our current understanding of multiple issues in modern hip and knee arthroplasty.

We present a comparison of the results of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients younger and older than 60 years of age. The ten-year all-cause survival of the < 60 years of age group (52) was 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12), while in the ≥ 60 years of age group (512), the figure was 96% (95% CI 3). For the younger group, the mean Hospital for Special Surgery score at ten-year follow-up (n = 21) was 94 of 100, compared with a mean of 86 of 100 for the older group (n = 135). The results show that the Oxford unicompartmental arthroplasty can achieve ten-year results that are comparable to total knee arthroplasty in patients < 60 years of age. We conclude that for patients aged over 50, age should not be considered a contraindication for this procedure.

Twenty patients underwent simultaneous bilateral medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Pre-operative hip-knee-ankle alignment and valgus stress radiographs were used to plan the desired post-operative alignment of the limb in accordance with established principles for unicompartmental arthroplasty. In each patient the planned alignment was the same for both knees. Overall, the mean planned post-operative alignment was to 2.3° of varus (0° to 5°).

The side and starting order of surgery were randomised, using conventional instrumentation for one knee and computer-assisted surgery for the opposite side.

The mean variation between the pre-operative plan and the achieved correction in the navigated and the non-navigated limb was 0.9° (sd 1.1; 0° to 4°) and 2.8° (sd 1.4; 1° to 7°), respectively. Using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, we found the difference in variation statistically significant (p < 0.001).

Assessment of lower limb alignment in the non-navigated group revealed that 12 (60%) were within ± 2° of the pre-operative plan, compared to 17 (87%) of the navigated cases.

Computer-assisted surgery significantly improves the post-operative alignment of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared to conventional techniques in patients undergoing bilateral simultaneous arthroplasty. Improved alignment after arthroplasty is associated with better function and increased longevity.

In arthritis of the varus knee, a high tibial osteotomy (HTO) redistributes load from the diseased medial compartment to the unaffected lateral compartment.

We report the outcome of 36 patients (33 men and three women) with 42 varus, arthritic knees who underwent HTO and dynamic correction using a Garches external fixator until they felt that normal alignment had been restored. The mean age of the patients was 54.11 years (34 to 68). Normal alignment was achieved at a mean 5.5 weeks (3 to 10) post-operatively. Radiographs, gait analysis and visual analogue scores for pain were measured pre- and post-operatively, at one year and at medium-term follow-up (mean six years; 2 to 10). Failure was defined as conversion to knee arthroplasty.

Pre-operative gait analysis divided the 42 knees into two equal groups with high (17 patients) or low (19 patients) adductor moments. After correction, a statistically significant (p < 0.001, t-test,) change in adductor moment was achieved and maintained in both groups, with a rate of failure of three knees (7.1%), and 89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 84.9 to 94.7) survivorship at medium-term follow-up.

At final follow-up, after a mean of 15.9 years (12 to 20), there was a survivorship of 59% (95% CI 59.6 to 68.9) irrespective of adductor moment group, with a mean time to conversion to knee arthroplasty of 9.5 years (3 to 18; 95% confidence interval ± 2.5).

HTO remains a useful option in the medium-term for the treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee but does not last in the long-term.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:601–7.

We present detailed information about early morbidity after aseptic revision knee replacement from a nationwide study. All aseptic revision knee replacements undertaken between 1st October 2009 and 30th September 2011 were analysed using the Danish National Patient Registry with additional information from the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. The 1218 revisions involving 1165 patients were subdivided into total revisions, large partial revisions, partial revisions and revisions of unicondylar replacements (UKR revisions). The mean age was 65.0 years (27 to 94) and the median length of hospital stay was four days (interquartile range: 3 to 5), with a 90 days re-admission rate of 9.9%, re-operation rate of 3.5% and mortality rate of 0.2%. The age ranges of 51 to 55 years (p = 0.018), 76 to 80 years (p < 0.001) and ≥ 81 years (p < 0.001) were related to an increased risk of re-admission. The age ranges of 76 to 80 years (p = 0.018) and the large partial revision subgroup (p = 0.073) were related to an increased risk of re-operation. The ages from 76 to 80 years (p < 0.001), age ≥ 81 years (p < 0.001) and surgical time > 120 min (p <  0.001) were related to increased length of hospital stay, whereas the use of a tourniquet (p = 0.008) and surgery in a low volume centre (p = 0.013) were related to shorter length of stay.

In conclusion, we found a similar incidence of early post-operative morbidity after aseptic knee revisions as has been reported after primary procedures. This suggests that a length of hospital stay ≤ four days and discharge home at that time is safe following aseptic knee revision surgery in Denmark.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1649–56.

The October 2015 Knee Roundup360 looks at: Allergy and outcome in arthroplasty; Physiotherapy and drains not such a bad combination?; Another nail in the coffin for arthroscopists?; Graft precondition hocus pocus; Extended dose steroids in knee arthritis?; Indolent peri-prosthetic infection; Computer modelling and medial knee arthritis

We performed a prospective, randomised controlled trial of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty comparing the performance of the Acrobot system with conventional surgery. A total of 27 patients (28 knees) awaiting unicompartmental knee arthroplasty were randomly allocated to have the operation performed conventionally or with the assistance of the Acrobot. The primary outcome measurement was the angle of tibiofemoral alignment in the coronal plane, measured by CT. Other secondary parameters were evaluated and are reported.

All of the Acrobot group had tibiofemoral alignment in the coronal plane within 2° of the planned position, while only 40% of the conventional group achieved this level of accuracy. While the operations took longer, no adverse effects were noted, and there was a trend towards improvement in performance with increasing accuracy based on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and American Knee Society scores at six weeks and three months. The Acrobot device allows the surgeon to reproduce a pre-operative plan more reliably than is possible using conventional techniques which may have clinical advantages.

Polyethylene particulate wear debris continues to be implicated in the aetiology of aseptic loosening following knee arthroplasty. The Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty employs a spherical femoral component and a fully congruous meniscal bearing to increase contact area and theoretically reduce the potential for polyethylene wear. This study measures the in vivo ten-year linear wear of the device, using a roentgenstereophotogrammetric technique.

In this in vivo study, seven medial Oxford unicompartmental prostheses, which had been implanted ten years previously were studied. Stereo pairs of radiographs were acquired for each patient and the films were analysed using a roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis calibration and a computer-aided design model silhouette-fitting technique. Penetration of the femoral component into the original volume of the bearing was our estimate of linear wear. In addition, eight control patients were examined less than three weeks post-insertion of an Oxford prosthesis, where no wear would be expected. The control group showed no measured wear and suggested a system accuracy of 0.1 mm. At ten years, the mean linear wear rate was 0.02 mm/year.

The results from this in vivo study confirm that the device has low ten-year linear wear in clinical practice. This may offer the device a survival advantage in the long term.

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.