This review examines the future of total hip arthroplasty, aiming to avoid past mistakes

Worldwide rates of primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are rising due to increased longevity of the population and the burden of osteoarthritis.

Revision TKA is a technically demanding procedure generating outcomes which are reported to be inferior to those of primary knee arthroplasty, and with a higher risk of complication. Overall, the rate of revision after primary arthroplasty is low, but the number of patients currently living with a TKA suggests a large potential revision healthcare burden.

Many patients are now outliving their prosthesis, and consideration must be given to how we are to provide the necessary capacity to meet the rising demand for revision surgery and how to maximise patient outcomes.

The purpose of this review was to examine the epidemiology of, and risk factors for, revision knee arthroplasty, and to discuss factors that may enhance patient outcomes.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:723–8.

Objectives

Subtotal or total meniscectomy in the medial or lateral compartment of the knee results in a high risk of future osteoarthritis. Meniscal allograft transplantation has been performed for over thirty years with the scientifically plausible hypothesis that it functions in a similar way to a native meniscus. It is thought that a meniscal allograft transplant has a chondroprotective effect, reducing symptoms and the long-term risk of osteoarthritis. However, this hypothesis has never been tested in a high-quality study on human participants. This study aims to address this shortfall by performing a pilot randomised controlled trial within the context of a comprehensive cohort study design.

Talonavicular and subtalar joint fusion through a medial incision (modified triple arthrodesis) has become an increasingly popular technique for treating symptomatic flatfoot deformity caused by posterior tibial tendon dysfunction.

The purpose of this study was to look at its clinical and radiological mid- to long-term outcomes, including the rates of recurrent flatfoot deformity, nonunion and avascular necrosis of the dome of the talus.

A total of 84 patients (96 feet) with a symptomatic rigid flatfoot deformity caused by posterior tibial tendon dysfunction were treated using a modified triple arthrodesis. The mean age of the patients was 66 years (35 to 85) and the mean follow-up was 4.7 years (1 to 8.3). Both clinical and radiological outcomes were analysed retrospectively.

In 86 of the 95 feet (90.5%) for which radiographs were available, there was no loss of correction at final follow-up. In all, 14 feet (14.7%) needed secondary surgery, six for nonunion, two for avascular necrosis, five for progression of the flatfoot deformity and tibiotalar arthritis and one because of symptomatic overcorrection. The mean American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Hindfoot score (AOFAS score) at final follow-up was 67 (between 16 and 100) and the mean visual analogue score for pain 2.4 points (between 0 and 10).

In conclusion, modified triple arthrodesis provides reliable correction of deformity and a good clinical outcome at mid- to long-term follow-up, with nonunion as the most frequent complication. Avascular necrosis of the talus is a rare but serious complication of this technique.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:668–74.

Whether to use total or unicompartmental knee replacement (TKA/UKA) for end-stage knee osteoarthritis remains controversial. Although UKA results in a faster recovery, lower rates of morbidity and mortality and fewer complications, the long-term revision rate is substantially higher than that for TKA. The effect of each intervention on patient-reported outcome remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether six-month patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are better in patients after TKA or UKA, using data from a large national joint registry (NJR).

We carried out a propensity score-matched cohort study which compared six-month PROMs after TKA and UKA in patients enrolled in the NJR for England and Wales, and the English national PROM collection programme. A total of 3519 UKA patients were matched to 10 557 TKAs.

The mean six-month PROMs favoured UKA: the Oxford Knee Score was 37.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) 37.4 to 38.0) for UKA and 36.1 (95% CI 35.9 to 36.3) for TKA; the mean EuroQol EQ-5D index was 0.772 (95% CI 0.764 to 0.780) for UKA and 0.751 (95% CI 0.747 to 0.756) for TKA. UKA patients were more likely to achieve excellent results (odds ratio (OR) 1.59, 95% CI 1.47 to 1.72, p < 0.001) and to be highly satisfied (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.39, p <  0.001), and were less likely to report complications than those who had undergone TKA.

UKA gives better early patient-reported outcomes than TKA; these differences are most marked for the very best outcomes. Complications and readmission are more likely after TKA. Although the data presented reflect the short-term outcome, they suggest that the high revision rate for UKA may not be because of poorer clinical outcomes. These factors should inform decision-making in patients eligible for either procedure.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:793–801.

This was a randomised controlled trial studying the safety of a new short metaphyseal fixation (SMF) stem. We hypothesised that it would have similar early clinical results and micromovement to those of a standard-length tapered Synergy metaphyseal fixation stem. Using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) we compared the two stems in 43 patients. A short metaphyseal fixation stem was used in 22 patients and a Synergy stem in 21 patients. No difference was found in the clinical outcomes pre- or post-operatively between groups. RSA showed no significant differences two years post-operatively in mean micromovement between the two stems (except for varus/valgus tilt at p = 0.05) (subsidence 0.94 mm (sd 1.71) vs 0.32 mm (sd 0.45), p = 0.66; rotation 0.96° (sd 1.49) vs 1.41° (sd 2.95), p = 0.88; and total migration 1.09 mm (sd 1.74) vs 0.73 mm (sd 0.72), p = 0.51). A few stems (four SMF and three Synergy) had initial migration > 1.0 mm but stabilised by three to six months, with the exception of one SMF stem which required revision three years post-operatively. For most stems, total micromovement was very low at two years (subsidence < 0.5 mm, rotation < 1.0°, total migration < 0.5 mm), which was consistent with osseous ingrowth. The small sample makes it difficult to confirm the universal applicability of or elucidate the potential contraindications to the use of this particular new design of stem.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:595–602.

The aim of this study was to determine whether obesity affects pain, surgical and functional outcomes following lumbar spinal fusion for low back pain (LBP).

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was made of those studies that compared the outcome of lumbar spinal fusion for LBP in obese and non-obese patients. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference in the pain and functional outcomes. Lumbar spinal fusion in the obese patient resulted in a statistically significantly greater intra-operative blood loss (weighted mean difference: 54.04 ml; 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.08 to 93.00; n = 112; p = 0.007) more complications (odds ratio: 1.91; 95% CI 1.68 to 2.18; n = 43858; p < 0.001) and longer duration of surgery (25.75 mins; 95% CI 15.61 to 35.90; n = 258; p < 0.001). Obese patients have greater intra-operative blood loss, more complications and longer duration of surgery but pain and functional outcome are similar to non-obese patients. Based on these results, obesity is not a contraindication to lumbar spinal fusion.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1395–1404.

Accurate, reproducible outcome measures are essential for the evaluation of any orthopaedic procedure, in both clinical practice and research.

Commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have drawbacks such as ‘floor’ and ‘ceiling’ effects, limitations of worldwide adaptability and an inability to distinguish pain from function. They are also unable to measure the true outcome of an intervention rather than a patient’s perception of that outcome.

Performance-based functional outcome tools may address these problems. It is important that both clinicians and researchers are aware of these measures when dealing with high-demand patients, using a new intervention or implant, or testing a new rehabilitation protocol.

This article provides an overview of some of the clinically-validated performance-based functional outcome tools used in the assessment of patients undergoing hip and knee surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1431–5.

The June 2014 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: suprascapular nerve and rotator cuff pathology; anchors in Bankart repair: it’s not what you’ve got, but how you use it; not all shoulder PROMs are equal; reverse shoulder arthroplasty OK in trauma; not all in the mind: frozen shoulder personality debunked; open and arthroscopic repair equivalent in shoulder instability; natural history of olecranon fractures not so bleak?; and resurfacing of the shoulder: a Danish perspective.

Total knee replacement (TKR) smart tibial trials have load-bearing sensors which will show quantitative compartment pressure values and femoral-tibial tracking patterns. Without smart trials, surgeons rely on feel and visual estimation of imbalance to determine if the knee is optimally balanced. Corrective soft-tissue releases are performed with minimal feedback as to what and how much should be released. The smart tibial trials demonstrate graphically where and how much imbalance is present, so that incremental releases can be performed. The smart tibial trials now also incorporate accelerometers which demonstrate the axial alignment. This now allows the surgeon the option to perform a slight recut of the tibia or femur to provide soft-tissue balance without performing soft-tissue releases. Using a smart tibial trial to assist with soft-tissue releases or bone re-cuts, improved patient outcomes have been demonstrated at one year in a multicentre study of 135 patients (135 knees).

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):78–83.

The April 2015 Wrist & Hand Roundup360 looks at: Non-operative hand fracture management; From the sublime to the ridiculous?; A novel approach to carpal tunnel decompression; Osteoporosis and functional scores in the distal radius; Ulnar variance and force distribution; Tourniquets in carpal tunnel under the spotlight; Scaphoid fractures reclassified; Osteoporosis and distal radial fracture fixation; PROMISing results in the upper limb

The October 2014 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: PRP is not effective in tennis elbow; eccentric physiotherapy effective in subacromial pain; dexamethasone in shoulder surgery; arthroscopic remplissage for engaging Hill-Sach’s lesions; a consistent approach to subacromial impingement; delay in fixation of proximal humeral fractures detrimental to outcomes.

The Swansea Morriston Achilles Rupture Treatment (SMART) programme was introduced in 2008. This paper summarises the outcome of this programme. Patients with a rupture of the Achilles tendon treated in our unit follow a comprehensive management protocol that includes a dedicated Achilles clinic, ultrasound examination, the use of functional orthoses, early weight-bearing, an accelerated exercise regime and guidelines for return to work and sport. The choice of conservative or surgical treatment was based on ultrasound findings.

The rate of re-rupture, the outcome using the Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) and the Achilles Tendon Repair Score, (AS), and the complications were recorded. An elementary cost analysis was also performed.

Between 2008 and 2014 a total of 273 patients presented with an acute rupture 211 of whom were managed conservatively and 62 had surgical repair. There were three re-ruptures (1.1%). There were 215 men and 58 women with a mean age of 46.5 years (20 to 86). Functional outcome was satisfactory. Mean ATRS and AS at four months was 53.0 (sd 14), 64.9 (sd 15) (n = 135), six months 67.8 (sd 16), 73.8 (sd 15) (n = 103) and nine months (72.4; sd 14) 72.3 (sd 13) (n = 43). The programme realised estimated cost savings exceeding £91 000 per annum.

The SMART programme resulted in a low rate of re-rupture, a satisfactory outcome, a reduced rate of surgical intervention and a reduction in healthcare costs.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:510–15.

The natural history of primary anterior dislocation of the glenohumeral joint in adolescent patients remains unclear and there is no consensus for management of these patients.

The objectives of this study were to report the natural history of primary anterior dislocation of the glenohumeral joint in adolescent patients and to identify the risk factors for recurrent dislocation.

We reviewed prospectively-collected clinical and radiological data on 133 adolescent patients diagnosed with a primary anterior dislocation of the glenohumeral joint who had been managed non-operatively at our hospital between 1996 and 2008. There were 115 male (86.5%) and 18 female patients (13.5%) with a mean age of 16.3 years (13 to 18) and a mean follow-up of 95.2 months (1 to 215).

During follow-up, 102 (absolute incidence of 76.7%) patients had a recurrent dislocation. The median interval between primary and recurrent dislocation was ten months (95% CI 7.4 to 12.6). Applying survival analysis the likelihood of having a stable shoulder one year after the initial injury was 59% (95% CI 51.2 to 66.8), 38% (95% CI 30.2 to 45.8%) after two years, 21% (95% CI 13.2 to 28.8) after five years, and 7% (95% CI 1.1 to 12.9) after ten years. Neither age nor gender significantly predicted recurrent dislocation during follow-up.

We conclude that adolescent patients with a primary anterior dislocation of the glenohumeral joint have a high rate of recurrent dislocation, which usually occurs within two years of their initial injury: these patients should be considered for early operative stabilisation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:520–6.

Radiological evidence of post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) after fracture of the tibial plateau is common but end-stage arthritis which requires total knee arthroplasty is much rarer.

The aim of this study was to examine the indications for, and outcomes of, total knee arthroplasty after fracture of the tibial plateau and to compare this with an age and gender-matched cohort of TKAs carried out for primary osteoarthritis.

Between 1997 and 2011, 31 consecutive patients (23 women, eight men) with a mean age of 65 years (40 to 89) underwent TKA at a mean of 24 months (2 to 124) after a fracture of the tibial plateau. Of these, 24 had undergone ORIF and seven had been treated non-operatively. Patients were assessed pre-operatively and at 6, 12 and > 60 months using the Short Form-12, Oxford Knee Score and a patient satisfaction score.

Patients with instability or nonunion needed total knee arthroplasty earlier (14 and 13.3 months post-injury) than those with intra-articular malunion (50 months, p < 0.001). Primary cruciate-retaining implants were used in 27 (87%) patients. Complication rates were higher in the PTOA cohort and included wound complications (13% vs 1% p = 0.014) and persistent stiffness (10% vs 0%, p = 0.014). Two (6%) PTOA patients required revision total knee arthroplasty at 57 and 114 months. The mean Oxford knee score was worse pre-operatively in the cohort with primary osteoarthritis (18 vs 30, p < 0.001) but there were no significant differences in post-operative Oxford knee score or patient satisfaction (primary osteoarthritis 86%, PTOA 78%, p = 0.437).

Total knee arthroplasty undertaken after fracture of the tibial plateau has a higher rate of complications than that undertaken for primary osteoarthritis, but patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction are comparable.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:532–8.

Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in the scores of patient-reported outcome measures allow clinicians to assess the outcome of intervention from the perspective of the patient. There has been significant variation in their absolute values in previous publications and a lack of consistency in their calculation.

The purpose of this study was first, to establish whether these values, following spinal surgery, vary depending on the surgical intervention and their method of calculation and secondly, to assess whether there is any correlation between the two external anchors most frequently used to calculate the MCID.

We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data of adult patients who underwent elective spinal surgery between 1994 and 2009. A total of 244 patients were included. There were 125 men and 119 women with a mean age of 54 years (16 to 84); the mean follow-up was 62 months (6 to 199) The MCID was calculated using three previously published methods.

Our results show that the value of the MCID varies considerably with the operation and its method of calculation. There was good correlation between the two external anchors. The global outcome tool correlated significantly better.

We conclude that consensus needs to be reached on the best method of calculating the MCID. This then needs to be defined for each spinal procedure. Using a blanket value for the MCID for all spinal procedures should be avoided.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:366–71.

The February 2015 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Syndesmosis screw removal in randomised controlled trial; Diagnostic value of Hawkins sign; Chevron rules supreme?; Diabetes and ankle replacement; Fixed-bearing ankle replacement; Fusion for osteomyelitis of the ankle; ‘Reformed’ fallers.

The use of robots in orthopaedic surgery is an emerging field that is gaining momentum. It has the potential for significant improvements in surgical planning, accuracy of component implantation and patient safety. Advocates of robot-assisted systems describe better patient outcomes through improved pre-operative planning and enhanced execution of surgery. However, costs, limited availability, a lack of evidence regarding the efficiency and safety of such systems and an absence of long-term high-impact studies have restricted the widespread implementation of these systems. We have reviewed the literature on the efficacy, safety and current understanding of the use of robotics in orthopaedics.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:292–9.

Fractures of the tibial shaft are common injuries, but there are no long-term outcome data in the era of increased surgical management. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of this injury at 12 to 22 years. Secondary aims were to determine the short- and long-term mortality, and if there were any predictors of clinical or functional outcome or mortality. From a prospective trauma database of 1502 tibial shaft fractures in 1474 consecutive adult patients, we identified a cohort of 1431 tibial diaphyseal fractures in 1403 patients, who fitted our inclusion criteria. There were 1024 men, and mean age at injury was 40.6 years. Fractures were classified according to the AO system, and open fractures graded after Gustilo and Anderson. Requirement of fasciotomy, time to fracture union, complications, incidence of knee and ankle pain at long-term follow-up, changes in employment and the patients’ social deprivation status were recorded. Function was assessed at 12 to 22 years post-injury using the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment and short form-12 questionnaires. Long-term functional outcome data was available for 568 of the surviving patients, 389 were deceased and 346 were lost to follow-up. Most fractures (90.7%, n = 1363) united without further intervention. Fasciotomies were performed in 11.5% of patients; this did not correlate with poorer functional outcome in the long term. Social deprivation was associated with a higher incidence of injury but had no impact on long-term function. The one-year mortality in those over 75 years of age was 29 (42%). At long-term follow-up, pain and function scores were good. However, 147 (26%) reported ongoing knee pain, 62 (10%) reported ankle pain and 97 (17%) reported both. Such joint pain correlated with poorer functional outcome.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1370–7.