Aims. Metal allergy in knee arthroplasty patients is a controversial topic. We aimed to conduct a scoping review to clarify the management of metal allergy in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. Studies were identified by searching electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase, from their inception to November 2020, for studies evaluating TKA patients with metal hypersensitivity/allergy. All studies reporting on diagnosing or managing metal hypersensitivity in TKA were included. Data were extracted and summarized based on study design, study population, interventions and outcomes. A practical guide is then formulated based on the available evidence. Results. We included 38 heterogeneous studies (two randomized controlled trials, six comparative studies, 19 case series, and 11 case reports). The evidence indicates that metal hypersensitivity is a rare complication with some histopathological features leading to pain and dissatisfaction with no reliable screening tests preoperatively. Hypoallergenic implants are viable alternatives for patients with self-reported/confirmed metal hypersensitivity if declared preoperatively; however, concerns remain over their long-term outcomes with ceramic implants outperforming titanium nitride-coated implants and informed consent is paramount. For patients presenting with painful TKA, metal hypersensitivity is a diagnosis of exclusion where patch skin testing, lymphocyte transformation test, and synovial biopsies are useful adjuncts before revision surgery is undertaken to hypoallergenic implants with shared decision-making and informed consent. Conclusion. Using the limited available evidence in the literature, we provide a practical approach to metal hypersensitivity in TKA patients. Future national/registry-based studies are needed to identify the scale of metal hypersensitivity, agreed diagnostic criteria, and management strategies. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):785–795

Aims. Prior studies have identified that malseating of a modular dual mobility liner can occur, with previous reported incidences between 5.8% and 16.4%. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of malseating in dual mobility implants at our institution, assess for risk factors for liner malseating, and investigate whether liner malseating has any impact on clinical outcomes after surgery. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the radiographs of 239 primary and revision total hip arthroplasties with a modular dual mobility liner. Two independent reviewers assessed radiographs for each patient twice for evidence of malseating, with a third observer acting as a tiebreaker. Univariate analysis was conducted to determine risk factors for malseating with Youden’s index used to identify cut-off points. Cohen’s kappa test was used to measure interobserver and intraobserver reliability. Results. In all, 12 liners (5.0%), including eight Stryker (6.8%) and four Zimmer Biomet (3.3%), had radiological evidence of malseating. Interobserver reliability was found to be 0.453 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.64), suggesting weak inter-rater agreement, with strong agreement being greater than 0.8. We found component size of 50 mm or less to be associated with liner malseating on univariate analysis (p = 0.031). Patients with malseated liners appeared to have no associated clinical consequences, and none required revision surgery at a mean of 14 months (1.4 to 99.2) postoperatively. Conclusion. The incidence of liner malseating was 5.0%, which is similar to other reports. Component size of 50 mm or smaller was identified as a risk factor for malseating. Surgeons should be aware that malseating can occur and implant design changes or changes in instrumentation should be considered to lower the risk of malseating. Although further follow-up is needed, it remains to be seen if malseating is associated with any clinical consequences. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):858–864

Aims. We aimed to evaluate the long-term outcome of highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) cemented acetabular components and assess whether any radiolucent lines (RLLs) which arose were progressive. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 170 patients who underwent 187 total hip arthroplasties at two hospitals with a minimum follow-up of ten years. All interventions were performed using the same combination of HXLPE cemented acetabular components with femoral stems made of titanium alloy. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed for the primary endpoint of acetabular component revision surgery for any reason and secondary endpoint of the appearance of RLLs. RLLs that had appeared once were observed over time. We statistically assessed potential relationships between RLLs and a number of factors, including the technique of femoral head autografting and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score. Results. The mean follow-up period was 13.0 years (10.0 to 16.3). Femoral head autografting was performed on 135 hips (72.2%). One acetabular component was retrieved because of deep infection. No revision was performed for the aseptic acetabular loosening. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve for the primary and secondary endpoints were 98.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 88.6% to 99.8%) and 79.3% (95% CI 72.8% to 84.6%), respectively. RLLs were detected in 38 hips (21.2%), at a mean of 1.7 years (1 month to 6 years) postoperatively. None of the RLLs were progressive, and the presence of RLLs did not show a significant association with the survival and clinical score. RLLs were more frequently observed in hips without femoral head autografts than in those with autografts. Conclusion. The use of HXLPE cemented acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes after ten years, and no RLLs were progressive, and their presence did not affect the outcome. Femoral head autografting did not negatively impact the acetabular component survival or the appearance of RLLs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(10):1604–1610

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term mortality rate, and to identify factors associated with this, following primary and revision knee arthroplasty (KA). Methods. Data from the Scottish Arthroplasty Project (1998 to 2019) were retrospectively analyzed. Patient mortality data were linked from the National Records of Scotland. Analyses were performed separately for the primary and revised KA cohorts. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated for the population at risk. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards were used to identify predictors and estimate relative mortality risks. Results. At a median 7.4 years (interquartile range (IQR) 4.0 to 11.6) follow-up, 27.8% of primary (n = 27,474/98,778) and 31.3% of revision (n = 2,611/8,343) KA patients had died. Both primary and revision cohorts had lower mortality rates than the general population (SMR 0.74 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.74); p < 0.001; SMR 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.86); p < 0.001, respectively), which persisted for 12 and eighteight years after surgery, respectively. Factors associated with increased risk of mortality after primary KA included male sex (hazard ratio (HR) 1.40 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.45)), increasing socioeconomic deprivation (HR 1.43 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.50)), inflammatory polyarthropathy (HR 1.79 (95% CI 1.68 to 1.90)), greater number of comorbidities (HR 1.59 (95% CI 1.51 to 1.68)), and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) requiring revision (HR 1.92 (95% CI 1.57 to 2.36)) when adjusting for age. Similarly, male sex (HR 1.36 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.49)), increasing socioeconomic deprivation (HR 1.31 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.52)), inflammatory polyarthropathy (HR 1.24 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.37)), greater number of comorbidities (HR 1.64 (95% CI 1.33 to 2.01)), and revision for PJI (HR 1.35 (95% 1.18 to 1.55)) were independently associated with an increased risk of mortality following revision KA when adjusting for age. Conclusion. The SMR of patients undergoing primary and revision KA was lower than that of the general population and remained so for several years post-surgery. However, approximately one in four patients undergoing primary and one in three patients undergoing revision KA died within tenten years of surgery. Several patient and surgical factors, including PJI, were associated with the risk of mortality within ten years of primary and revision surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):45–52

Aims. To compare rates of serious adverse events in patients undergoing revision knee arthroplasty with consideration of the indication for revision (urgent versus elective indications), and compare these with primary arthroplasty and re-revision arthroplasty. Methods. Patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty were identified in the national Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) between 1 April 1997 to 31 March 2017. Subsequent revision and re-revision arthroplasty procedures in the same patients and same knee were identified. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality and a logistic regression model was used to investigate factors associated with 90-day mortality and secondary adverse outcomes, including infection (undergoing surgery), pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Urgent indications for revision arthroplasty were defined as infection or fracture, and all other indications (e.g. loosening, instability, wear) were included in the elective indications cohort. Results. A total of 939,021 primary knee arthroplasty procedures were included (939,021 patients), of which 40,854 underwent subsequent revision arthroplasty, and 9,100 underwent re-revision arthroplasty. Revision surgery for elective indications was associated with a 90-day rate of mortality of 0.44% (135/30,826; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.52) which was comparable to primary knee arthroplasty (0.46%; 4,292/939,021; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.47). Revision arthroplasty for infection was associated with a much higher mortality of 2.04% (184/9037; 95% CI 1.75 to 2.35; odds ratio (OR) 3.54; 95% CI 2.81 to 4.46), as was revision for periprosthetic fracture at 5.25% (52/991; 95% CI 3.94 to 6.82; OR 6.23; 95% CI 4.39 to 8.85). Higher rates of pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, and stroke were also observed in the infection and fracture cohort. Conclusion. Patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for urgent indications (infection or fracture) are at higher risk of mortality and serious adverse events in comparison to primary knee arthroplasty and revision arthroplasty for elective indications. These findings will be important for patient consent and shared decision-making and should inform service design for this patient cohort. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(10):1578–1585

Aims. Joint registries classify all further arthroplasty procedures to a knee with an existing partial arthroplasty as revision surgery, regardless of the actual procedure performed. Relatively minor procedures, including bearing exchanges, are classified in the same way as major operations requiring augments and stems. A new classification system is proposed to acknowledge and describe the detail of these procedures, which has implications for risk, recovery, and health economics. Methods. Classification categories were proposed by a surgical consensus group, then ranked by patients, according to perceived invasiveness and implications for recovery. In round one, 26 revision cases were classified by the consensus group. Results were tested for inter-rater reliability. In round two, four additional cases were added for clarity. Round three repeated the survey one month later, subject to inter- and intrarater reliability testing. In round four, five additional expert partial knee arthroplasty surgeons were asked to classify the 30 cases according to the proposed revision partial knee classification (RPKC) system. Results. Four classes were proposed: PR1, where no bone-implant interfaces are affected; PR2, where surgery does not include conversion to total knee arthroplasty, for example, a second partial arthroplasty to a native compartment; PR3, when a standard primary total knee prosthesis is used; and PR4 when revision components are necessary. Round one resulted in 92% inter-rater agreement (Kendall’s W 0.97; p < 0.005), rising to 93% in round two (Kendall’s W 0.98; p < 0.001). Round three demonstrated 97% agreement (Kendall’s W 0.98; p < 0.001), with high intra-rater reliability (interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 0.99). Round four resulted in 80% agreement (Kendall’s W 0.92; p < 0.001). Conclusion. The RPKC system accounts for all procedures which may be appropriate following partial knee arthroplasty. It has been shown to be reliable, repeatable and pragmatic. The implications for patient care and health economics are discussed. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):638–645

We compared revision and mortality rates of 4668 patients undergoing primary total hip and knee replacement between 1989 and 2007 at a University Hospital in New Zealand. The mean age at the time of surgery was 69 years (16 to 100). A total of 1175 patients (25%) had died at follow-up at a mean of ten years post-operatively. The mean age of those who died within ten years of surgery was 74.4 years (29 to 97) at time of surgery. No change in comorbidity score or age of the patients receiving joint replacement was noted during the study period. No association of revision or death could be proven with higher comorbidity scoring, grade of surgeon, or patient gender.

We found that patients younger than 50 years at the time of surgery have a greater chance of requiring a revision than of dying, those around 58 years of age have a 50:50 chance of needing a revision, and in those older than 62 years the prosthesis will normally outlast the patient. Patients over 77 years old have a greater than 90% chance of dying than requiring a revision whereas those around 47 years are on average twice as likely to require a revision than die. This information can be used to rationalise the need for long-term surveillance and during the informed consent process.

Aims. Wear of the polyethylene (PE) tibial insert of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) increases the risk of revision surgery with a significant cost burden on the healthcare system. This study quantifies wear performance of tibial inserts in a large and diverse series of retrieved TKAs to evaluate the effect of factors related to the patient, knee design, and bearing material on tibial insert wear performance. Methods. An institutional review board-approved retrieval archive was surveyed for modular PE tibial inserts over a range of in vivo duration (mean 58 months (0 to 290)). Five knee designs, totalling 1,585 devices, were studied. Insert wear was estimated from measured thickness change using a previously published method. Linear regression statistical analyses were used to test association of 12 patient and implant design variables with calculated wear rate. Results. Five patient-specific variables and seven implant-specific variables were evaluated for significant association with lower insert wear rate. Six were significant when controlling for other factors: greater patient age, female sex, shorter duration in vivo, polished tray, highly cross-linked PE (HXLPE), and constrained knee design. Conclusion. This study confirmed that knee wear rate increased with duration in vivo. Older patients and females had significantly lower wear rates. Polished modular tibial tray surfaces, HXLPE, and constrained TKA designs were device design factors associated with significantly reduced wear rate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1695–1701

We report the results of 79 patients (81 hips) who underwent impaction grafting at revision hip replacement using the Exeter femoral stem. Their mean age was 64 years (31 to 83). According to the Endoklinik classification, 20 hips had a type 2 bone defect, 40 had type 3, and 21 had type 4. The mean follow-up for unrevised stems was 10.4 years (5 to 17).

There were 12 re-operations due to intra- and post-operative fractures, infection (one hip) and aseptic loosening (one hip). All re-operations affected type 3 (6 hips) and 4 (6 hips) bone defects. The survival rate for re-operation for any cause was 100% for type 2, 81.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 67.1 to 95.3) for type 3, and 70.8% (95% CI 51.1 to 90.5) for type 4 defects at 14 years. The survival rate with further revision for aseptic loosening as the end point was 98.6% (95% CI 95.8 to 100). The final clinical score was higher for patients with type 2 bone defects than type 4 regarding pain, function and range of movement. Limp was most frequent in the type 4 group (p < 0.001). The mean subsidence of the stem was 2.3 mm (sd 3.7) for hips with a type 2 defect, 4.3 mm (sd 7.2) for type 3 and 9.6 mm (sd 10.8) for type 4 (p = 0.022).

The impacted bone grafting technique has good clinical results in femoral revision. However, major bone defects affect clinical outcome and also result in more operative complications.

Aims. Stiffness is a common complication after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Pathogenesis is not understood, treatment options are limited, and diagnosis is challenging. The aim of this study was to investigate if MRI can be used to visualize intra-articular scarring in patients with stiff, painful knee arthroplasties. Methods. Well-functioning primary TKAs (n = 11), failed non-fibrotic TKAs (n = 5), and patients with a clinical diagnosis of fibrosis. 1. (n = 8) underwent an MRI scan with advanced metal suppression (Slice Encoding for Metal Artefact Correction, SEMAC) with gadolinium contrast. Fibrotic tissue (low intensity on T1 and T2, low-moderate post-contrast enhancement) was quantified (presence and tissue thickness) in six compartments: supra/infrapatella, medial/lateral gutters, and posterior medial/lateral. Results. Fibrotic tissue was identified in all patients studied. However, tissue was significantly thicker in fibrotic patients (4.4 mm ± 0.2 mm) versus non-fibrotic (2.5 mm ± 0.4 mm) and normal TKAs (1.9 mm ± 0.2 mm, p = < 0.05). Significant (> 4 mm thick) tissue was seen in 26/48 (54%) of compartments examined in the fibrotic group, compared with 17/30 (57%) non-fibrotic, and 10/66 (15%) normal TKAs. Although revision surgery did improve range of movement (ROM) in all fibrotic patients, clinically significant restriction remained post-surgery. Conclusion. Stiff TKAs contain intra-articular fibrotic tissue that is identifiable by MRI. Studies should evaluate whether MRI is useful for surgical planning of debridement, and as a non-invasive measurement tool following interventions for stiffness caused by fibrosis. Revision for stiffness can improve ROM, but outcomes are sub-optimal and new treatments are required. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(10):1331–1340

Sixteen patients who underwent a revision operation for nonunion of fractures of the distal humerus following previous internal fixation were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 39 months (8 to 69).

The Mayo elbow performance score was excellent in 11, good in two, fair in two and poor in one. In 15 patients union was achieved and in one with an infected nonunion a subsequent bone graft was necessary in order to obtain union.

Age, gender, a history of smoking, mechanism of the injury and the AO classification of the initial fracture did not correlate with the development of nonunion. In 12 patients (75%), the initial fixation was assessed as being suboptimal. The primary surgery was regarded as adequate in only three patients. Our findings suggest that the most important determinant of nonunion of a distal humeral fracture after surgery is the adequacy of fixation.

Hip fractures pose a major global health challenge, leading to high rates of morbidity and mortality, particularly among the elderly. With an ageing population, the incidence of these injuries is rising, exerting significant pressure on healthcare systems worldwide. Despite substantial research aimed at establishing best practice, several key areas remain the subject of ongoing debate. This article examines the latest evidence on the place of arthroplasty in the surgical treatment of hip fractures, with a particular focus on the choice of implant, the use of cemented versus uncemented fixation, and advances in perioperative care.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1372–1376.

Aims

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) are complex procedures with higher rates of re-revision, complications, and mortality compared to primary TKA and THA. We report the effects of the establishment of a revision arthroplasty network (the East Midlands Specialist Orthopaedic Network; EMSON) on outcomes of rTKA and rTHA.

Aims

The aims of this study were to identify and evaluate the current literature examining the prognostic factors which are associated with failure of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is the preferred treatment for anterior medial knee osteoarthritis (OA) owing to the rapid postoperative recovery. However, the risk factors for UKA failure remain controversial.

The April 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Do technical errors determine outcomes of operatively managed femoral neck fractures in younger adults?; Single-stage or two-stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection (INFORM); Fixation better than revision in type B periprosthetic fractures of taper slip stems; Can you maximize femoral head size at the expense of liner thickness?; Plasma D-dimer for periprosthetic joint infection?; How important is in vivo oxidation?; Total hip arthroplasty for HIV patients with osteonecrosis.

Aims

Achievement of accurate microbiological diagnosis prior to revision is key to reducing the high rates of persistent infection after revision knee surgery. The effect of change in the microorganism between the first- and second-stage revision of total knee arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) on the success of management is not clear.

The April 2023 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ 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.