Aims. The use of cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) components has increased during the past decade. The initial design of cementless metal-backed patellar components had shown high failure rates due to many factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of a second-generation cementless, metal-backed patellar component of a modern design. Methods. This was a retrospective review of 707 primary TKAs in 590 patients from a single institution, using a cementless, metal-backed patellar component with a mean follow-up of 6.9 years (2 to 12). A total of 409 TKAs were performed in 338 females and 298 TKAs in 252 males. The mean age of the patients was 63 years (34 to 87) and their mean BMI was 34.3 kg/m. 2. (18.8 to 64.5). The patients were chosen to undergo a cementless procedure based on age and preoperative radiological and intraoperative bone quality. Outcome was assessed using the Knee Society knee and function scores and range of motion (ROM), complications, and revisions. Results. A total of 24 TKAs (3.4%) in 24 patients failed and required revision surgery, of which five were due to patellar complications (0.71%): one for aseptic patellar loosening (0.14%) and four for polyethylene dissociation (0.57%). A total of 19 revisions (2.7%) were undertaken in 19 patients for indications which did not relate to the patella: four for aseptic tibial loosening (0.57%), one for aseptic femoral loosening (0.14%), nine for periprosthetic infection (1.3%), one for popliteus impingement (0.14%), and four for instability (0.57%). Knee Society knee and function scores, and ROM, improved significantly when comparing pre- and postoperative values. Survival of the metal-backed patellar component for all-cause failure was 97.5% (95% confidence interval 94.9% to 100%) at 12 years. Conclusion. The second-generation cementless TKA design of metal-backed patellar components showed a 97.5% survival at 12 years, with polyethylene dissociation from the metal-backing being the most common cause of patellar failure. In view of the increased use of TKA, especially in younger, more active, or obese patients, these findings are encouraging at mean follow-up of seven years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(12):1279–1285

The October 2024 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Fracture risk among stroke survivors according to post-stroke disability status and stroke type; Noise-induced hearing loss: should surgeons be wearing ear protection during primary total joint replacement?; Intravenous dexamethasone in hip arthroscopy can enhance recovery; Patient-reported outcomes following periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and knee: a longitudinal, prospective observational study; When should surgery take place after weight loss?; Which type of surgery is the hardest physically and mentally?

The October 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Does the primary surgical approach matter when choosing the approach for revision total hip arthroplasty?; Time to achieve the minimal clinically important difference in primary total hip arthroplasty: comparison of anterior and posterior surgical approaches; To scope or not to scope: arthroscopy as an adjunct to PAO does not provide better clinical outcomes at one year than PAO alone; Re-exploring horizons in hip resurfacing: two-year results of a ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing; Association between tranexamic acid and decreased periprosthetic joint infection risk in patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty; Octogenarians fare well: in revision for infection age is not a bar

The June 2024 Knee Roundup. 360. looks at: The estimated lifetime risk of revision after primary knee arthroplasty influenced by age, sex, and indication; Should high-risk patients seek out care from high-volume surgeons?; Stability and fracture rates in medial unicondylar knee arthroplasties; Rethinking antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures post-arthroplasty; Evaluating DAIR: a viable alternative for acute periprosthetic joint infection; The characteristics and predictors of mortality in periprosthetic fractures around the knee; Patient health-related quality of life deteriorates significantly while waiting six to 12 months for total hip or knee arthroplasty; The importance of looking for diversity in knee implants

The April 2023 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Ear protection for orthopaedic surgeons?; Has arthroscopic meniscectomy use changed in response to the evidence?; Time to positivity of cultures obtained for periprosthetic joint infection; Bisphosphonates for post-COVID-19 osteonecrosis of the femoral head; Missing missed fractures: is AI the answer?; Congenital insensitivity to pain and correction of the knee; YouTube and paediatric elbow injuries

The August 2024 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Effect of vitamin D deficiency on periprosthetic joint infection and complications after primary total joint replacement; Postoperative angiotensin receptor blocker use associated with decreased rates of manipulation under anaesthesia in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty; Central sensitization: the missing link between psychological distress and poor outcome following primary total knee arthroplasty; Thromboprophylaxis for the trauma and orthopaedic surgeon; Life expectancy after treatment of metastatic bone disease: an international trend analysis

The August 2023 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Can artificial intelligence improve the readability of patient education materials?; What is the value of radiology input during a multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conference?; Periprosthetic joint infection in patients with multiple arthroplasties; Orthopedic Surgery and Anesthesiology Surgical Improvement Strategies Project - Phase III outcomes; Knot tying in arthroplasty and arthroscopy causes lesions to surgical gloves: a potential risk of infection; Vascular calcification of the ankle in plain radiographs equals diabetes mellitus?

The October 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome at ten years – how do athletes do?; Venous thromboembolism in patients following total joint replacement: are transfusions to blame?; What changes in pelvic sagittal tilt occur 20 years after total hip arthroplasty?; Can stratified care in hip arthroscopy predict successful and unsuccessful outcomes?; Hip replacement into your nineties; Can large language models help with follow-up?; The most taxing of revisions – proximal femoral replacement for periprosthetic joint infection – what’s the benefit of dual mobility?

The February 2024 Knee Roundup. 360. looks at: Do patients with hypoallergenic total knee arthroplasty implants for metal allergy do worse? An analysis of healthcare utilizations and patient-reported outcome measures; Defining a successful total knee arthroplasty; Incidence, microbiological studies, and factors associated with periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty; A modified Delphi consensus statement on patellar instability; Cause for concern? Significant cement coverage in retrieved metaphyseal cones after revision total knee arthroplasty; Prevalence of post-traumatic osteoarthritis after anterior cruciate ligament injury remains high despite advances in surgical techniques; Cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy for traumatic meniscal tears in patients aged under 45 years

The August 2023 Knee Roundup. 360. looks at: Curettage and cementation of giant cell tumour of bone: is arthritis a given?; Anterior knee pain following total knee arthroplasty: does the patellar cement-bone interface affect postoperative anterior knee pain?; Nickel allergy and total knee arthroplasty; The use of artificial intelligence for the prediction of periprosthetic joint infection following aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty; Ambulatory unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: development of a patient selection tool using machine learning; Femoral asymmetry: a missing piece in knee alignment; Needle arthroscopy – a benefit to patients in the outpatient setting; Can lateral unicompartmental knees be done in a day-case setting?

The April 2023 Foot & Ankle Roundup. 360. looks at: Outcomes following a two-stage revision total ankle arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection; Temporary bridge plate fixation and joint motion after an unstable Lisfranc injury; Outcomes of fusion in type II os naviculare; Total ankle arthroplasty versus arthrodesis for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis; Normal saline for plantar fasciitis: placebo or therapeutic?; Distraction arthroplasty for ankle osteoarthritis: does it work?; Let there be movement: ankle arthroplasty after previous fusion; Morbidity and mortality after diabetic Charcot foot arthropathy

The February 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Arthroscopic capsular release or manipulation under anaesthesia for frozen shoulder?; Distal biceps repair through a single incision?; Distal biceps tendon ruptures: diagnostic strategy through physical examination; Postoperative multimodal opioid-sparing protocol vs standard opioid prescribing after knee or shoulder arthroscopy: a randomized clinical trial; Graft healing is more important than graft technique in massive rotator cuff tear; Subscapularis tenotomy versus peel after anatomic shoulder arthroplasty; Previous rotator cuff repair increases the risk of revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty; Conservative versus operative treatment of acromial and scapular spine fractures following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Prophylactic antibiotics are important in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty. Their effectiveness depends on the choice of antibiotic and the optimum timing of their administration, to ensure adequate tissue concentrations. Cephalosporins are typically used, but an increasing number of resistant organisms are causing PJI, leading to the additional use of vancomycin. There are difficulties, however, with the systemic administration of vancomycin including its optimal timing, due to the need for prolonged administration, and potential adverse reactions. Intraosseous regional administration distal to a tourniquet is an alternative and attractive mode of delivery due to the ease of obtaining intraosseous access. Many authors have reported the effectiveness of intraosseous prophylaxis in achieving higher concentrations of antibiotic in the tissues compared with intravenous administration, providing equal or enhanced prophylaxis while minimizing adverse effects. This annotation describes the technique of intraosseous administration of antibiotics and summarizes the relevant clinical literature to date. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(11):1135–1139

Aims. We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage and single-stage revision surgeries among patients with infected primary hip arthroplasty. Methods. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary arthroplasty revised with single-stage or two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014 were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HRs) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies. Results. In total, 535 primary hip arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,525 person-years) and 1,605 with two-stage procedure (5,885 person-years). All-cause re-revision was higher following single-stage revision, especially in the first three months (HR at 3 months = 1.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 3.43), p = 0.009). The risks were comparable thereafter. Re-revision for PJI was higher in the first three postoperative months for single-stage revision and waned with time (HR at 3 months = 1.81 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.68), p = 0.003; HR at 6 months = 1.25 (95% CI 0.71 to 2.21), p = 0.441; HR at 12 months = 0.94 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.63), p = 0.819). Patients initially managed with a single-stage revision received fewer revision operations (mean 1.3 (SD 0.7) vs 2.2 (SD 0.6), p < 0.001). Mortality rates were comparable between these two procedures (29/10,000 person-years vs 33/10,000). Conclusion. The risk of unplanned re-revision was lower following two-stage revision, but only in the early postoperative period. The lower overall number of revision procedures associated with a single-stage revision strategy and the equivalent mortality rates to two-stage revision are reassuring. With appropriate counselling, single-stage revision is a viable option for the treatment of hip PJI. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(5):321–330

Aims. The duration of systemic antibiotic treatment following first-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is contentious. Our philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, and to use a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics in cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. The aim of this study was to assess the success of this philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol. Methods. The study involved a retrospective review of our prospectively collected database from which we identified all patients who underwent an intended two-stage revision for PJI of the hip. All patients had a diagnosis of PJI according to the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2013, a minimum five-year follow-up, and were assessed using the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool. The outcomes were grouped into ‘successful’ or ‘unsuccessful’. Results. A total of 299 two-stage revision THAs in 289 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 258 (86%) proceeded to second-stage surgery. Their mean age was 68.1 years (28 to 92). The median follow-up was 10.7 years (interquartile range (IQR) 6.3 to 15.0). A 91% success rate was seen in those patients who underwent reimplantation, decreasing to 86% when including those who did not proceed to reimplantation. The median duration of postoperative systemic antibiotics following the first stage was five days (IQR 5 to 9). There was no significant difference in outcome between those patients who were treated with antibiotics for ≤ 48 hours (p = 0.961) or ≤ five days (p = 0.376) compared with those who were treated with longer courses. Greater success rates were seen for Gram-positive PJIs (87%) than for Gram-negative (84%) and mixed-Gram PJIs (72%; p = 0.098). Conclusion. Aggressive surgical debridement with a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics at the time of first-stage revision surgery for PJI of the hip, without prolonged systemic antibiotics, provides a high rate of success, responsible antibiotic stewardship, and reduced hospital costs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):511–517

Aims. We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage revision surgery and single-stage revision surgery among patients with infected primary knee arthroplasty. Methods. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary knee arthroplasty, initially revised with a single-stage or a two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014, were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HR) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies. Results. A total of 489 primary knee arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,390 person-years) and 2,377 with two-stage procedure (8,349 person-years). The adjusted incidence rates of all-cause re-revision and for infection were comparable between these strategies (HR overall five years, 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.52), p = 0.308; HR overall five years, 0.99 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.39), p = 0.949, respectively). Patients initially managed with single-stage revision received fewer revision procedures overall than after two-stage revision (1.2 vs 2.2, p < 0.001). Mortality was lower for single-stage revision between six and 18 months postoperative (HR at six months, 0.51 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.00), p = 0.049 HR at 18 months, 0.33 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.99), p = 0.048) and comparable at other timepoints. Conclusion. The risk of re-revision was similar between single- and two-stage revision for infected primary knee arthroplasty. Single-stage group required fewer revisions overall, with lower or comparable mortality at specific postoperative periods. The single-stage revision is a safe and effective strategy to treat infected knee arthroplasties. There is potential for increased use to reduce the burden of knee PJI for patients, and for the healthcare system. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(10):690–699

Chondrosarcoma is the second most common surgically treated primary bone sarcoma. Despite a large number of scientific papers in the literature, there is still significant controversy about diagnostics, treatment of the primary tumour, subtypes, and complications. Therefore, consensus on its day-to-day treatment decisions is needed. In January 2024, the Birmingham Orthopaedic Oncology Meeting (BOOM) attempted to gain global consensus from 300 delegates from over 50 countries. The meeting focused on these critical areas and aimed to generate consensus statements based on evidence amalgamation and expert opinion from diverse geographical regions. In parallel, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in oncological reconstructions poses unique challenges due to factors such as adjuvant treatments, large exposures, and the complexity of surgery. The meeting debated two-stage revisions, antibiotic prophylaxis, managing acute PJI in patients undergoing chemotherapy, and defining the best strategies for wound management and allograft reconstruction. The objectives of the meeting extended beyond resolving immediate controversies. It sought to foster global collaboration among specialists attending the meeting, and to encourage future research projects to address unsolved dilemmas. By highlighting areas of disagreement and promoting collaborative research endeavours, this initiative aims to enhance treatment standards and potentially improve outcomes for patients globally. This paper sets out some of the controversies and questions that were debated in the meeting. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5):425–429

Aims. The prevalence of obesity is increasing substantially around the world. Elevated BMI increases the risk of complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We sought to evaluate trends in BMI and complication rates of obese patients undergoing primary THA over the last 30 years. Methods. Through our institutional total joint registry, we identified 15,455 primary THAs performed for osteoarthritis from 1990 to 2019. Patients were categorized according to the World Health Organization (WHO) obesity classification and groups were trended over time. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis controlling for confounders was used to investigate the association between year of surgery and two-year risk of any reoperation, any revision, dislocation, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), venous thromboembolism (VTE), and periprosthetic fracture. Regression was stratified by three separate groups: non-obese; WHO Class I and Class II (BMI 30 to 39 kg/m. 2. ); and WHO Class III patients (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m. 2. ). Results. There was a significant increase in the proportion of all obesity classes from 1990 to 2019, and the BMI values within each WHO class significantly increased over time. Risk of any reoperation did not change over time among non-obese or WHO Class I/II patients, but increased for WHO Class III patients (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04; p = 0.044). Risk of dislocation decreased over time for non-obese (HR 0.96; p < 0.001) and WHO Class I/II (HR 0.96; p = 0.002) patients, but did not change over time for WHO Class III (HR 0.94; p = 0.073) patients. Risks of any revision and PJI did not change over time for any group. Conclusion. The proportion of patients undergoing THA who are obese has increased dramatically at our institution between 1990 and 2019. Despite BMI values increasing within all WHO classes over time, two-year complication risks have remained stable or decreased in WHO Class I/II patients. However, continued efforts will be required to mitigate risks in the heaviest WHO Class III patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(11):1223–1230

Aims. Biofilm-related infection is a major complication that occurs in orthopaedic surgery. Various treatments are available but efficacy to eradicate infections varies significantly. A systematic review was performed to evaluate therapeutic interventions combating biofilm-related infections on in vivo animal models. Methods. Literature research was performed on PubMed and Embase databases. Keywords used for search criteria were “bone AND biofilm”. Information on the species of the animal model, bacterial strain, evaluation of biofilm and bone infection, complications, key findings on observations, prevention, and treatment of biofilm were extracted. Results. A total of 43 studies were included. Animal models used included fracture-related infections (ten studies), periprosthetic joint infections (five studies), spinal infections (three studies), other implant-associated infections, and osteomyelitis. The most common bacteria were Staphylococcus species. Biofilm was most often observed with scanning electron microscopy. The natural history of biofilm revealed that the process of bacteria attachment, proliferation, maturation, and dispersal would take 14 days. For systemic mono-antibiotic therapy, only two of six studies using vancomycin reported significant biofilm reduction, and none reported eradication. Ten studies showed that combined systemic and topical antibiotics are needed to achieve higher biofilm reduction or eradication, and the effect is decreased with delayed treatment. Overall, 13 studies showed promising therapeutic potential with surface coating and antibiotic loading techniques. Conclusion. Combined topical and systemic application of antimicrobial agents effectively reduces biofilm at early stages. Future studies with sustained release of antimicrobial and biofilm-dispersing agents tailored to specific pathogens are warranted to achieve biofilm eradication. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(10):700–714

Aims. Contemporary outcomes of primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) with highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) liners in patients with inflammatory arthritis have not been well studied. This study examined the implant survivorship, complications, radiological results, and clinical outcomes of THA in patients with inflammatory arthritis. Methods. We identified 418 hips (350 patients) with a primary diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis who underwent primary THA with HXLPE liners from January 2000 to December 2017. Of these hips, 68% had rheumatoid arthritis (n = 286), 13% ankylosing spondylitis (n = 53), 7% juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (n = 29), 6% psoriatic arthritis (n = 24), 5% systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 23), and 1% scleroderma (n = 3). Mean age was 58 years (SD 14.8), 66.3% were female (n = 277), and mean BMI was 29 kg/m. 2. (SD 7). Uncemented femoral components were used in 77% of cases (n = 320). Uncemented acetabular components were used in all patients. Competing risk analysis was used accounting for death. Mean follow-up was 4.5 years (2 to 18). Results. The ten-year cumulative incidence of any revision was 3%, and was highest in psoriatic arthritis patients (16%). The most common indications for the 15 revisions were dislocations (n = 8) and periprosthetic joint infections (PJI; n = 4, all on disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs)). The ten-year cumulative incidence of reoperation was 6.1%, with the most common indications being wound infections (six cases, four on DMARDs) and postoperative periprosthetic femur fractures (two cases, both uncemented femoral components). The ten-year cumulative incidence of complications not requiring reoperation was 13.1%, with the most common being intraoperative periprosthetic femur fracture (15 cases, 14 uncemented femoral components; p = 0.13). Radiological evidence of early femoral component subsidence was observed in six cases (all uncemented). Only one femoral component ultimately developed aseptic loosening. Harris Hip Scores substantially improved (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Contemporary primary THAs with HXLPE in patients with inflammatory arthritis had excellent survivorship and good functional outcomes regardless of fixation method. Dislocation, PJI, and periprosthetic fracture were the most common complications in this cohort with inflammatory arthritis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(7):768–774