Aims. Day-case knee and hip replacement, in which patients are discharged on the day of surgery, has been gaining popularity during the last two decades, and particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic review presents the evidence comparing day-case to inpatient-stay surgery. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed of MEDLINE, Embase, and grey literature databases to include all studies which compare day-case with inpatient knee and hip replacement. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate using a random effects model. The protocol was registered prospectively (PROSPERO CRD42023392811). Results. A total of 38 studies were included, with a total of 83,888 day-case procedures. The studies were predominantly from the USA and Canada, observational, and with a high risk of bias. Day-case patients were a mean of 2.08 years younger (95% CI 1.05 to 3.12), were more likely to be male (odds ratio (OR) 1.3 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.41)), and had a lower mean BMI and American Society of Anesthesiologists grades compared with inpatients. Overall, day-case surgery was associated with significantly lower odds of readmission (OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.96); p = 0.009), subsequent emergency department attendance (OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.79); p < 0.001), and complications (OR 0.7 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.89) p = 0.004), than inpatient surgery. There were no significant differences in the rates of reoperation or mortality. The overall rate of successful same-day discharge for day-case surgery was 85% (95% CI 81 to 88). Patient-reported outcome measures and cost-effectiveness were either equal or favoured day-case. Conclusion. Within the limitations of the literature, in particular the substantial risk of selection bias, the outcomes following day-case knee and hip replacement appear not to be inferior to those following an inpatient stay. The evidence is more robust for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) than for total knee replacement (TKR) or total hip replacement (THR). The rate of successful same-day discharge is highest in UKR, followed by TKR and comparatively lower in THR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1385–1392

Aims. During total knee replacement (TKR), surgeons can choose whether or not to resurface the patella, with advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Recently, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended always resurfacing the patella, rather than never doing so. NICE found insufficient evidence on selective resurfacing (surgeon’s decision based on intraoperative findings and symptoms) to make recommendations. If effective, selective resurfacing could result in optimal individualized patient care. This protocol describes a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of primary TKR with always patellar resurfacing compared to selective patellar resurfacing. Methods. The PAtellar Resurfacing Trial (PART) is a patient- and assessor-blinded multicentre, pragmatic parallel two-arm randomized superiority trial of adults undergoing elective primary TKR for primary osteoarthritis at NHS hospitals in England, with an embedded internal pilot phase (ISRCTN 33276681). Participants will be randomly allocated intraoperatively on a 1:1 basis (stratified by centre and implant type (cruciate-retaining vs cruciate-sacrificing)) to always resurface or selectively resurface the patella, once the surgeon has confirmed sufficient patellar thickness for resurfacing and that constrained implants are not required. The primary analysis will compare the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) one year after surgery. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported outcome measures at three months, six months, and one year (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, OKS, EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, patient satisfaction, postoperative complications, need for further surgery, resource use, and costs). Cost-effectiveness will be measured for the lifetime of the patient. Overall, 530 patients will be recruited to obtain 90% power to detect a four-point difference in OKS between the groups one year after surgery, assuming up to 40% resurfacing in the selective group. Conclusion. The trial findings will provide evidence about the clinical and cost-effectiveness of always patellar resurfacing compared to selective patellar resurfacing. This will inform future NICE guidelines on primary TKR and the role of selective patellar resurfacing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(6):464–478

Aims. Debate remains whether the patella should be resurfaced during total knee replacement (TKR). For non-resurfaced TKRs, we estimated what the revision rate would have been if the patella had been resurfaced, and examined the risk of re-revision following secondary patellar resurfacing. Methods. A retrospective observational study of the National Joint Registry (NJR) was performed. All primary TKRs for osteoarthritis alone performed between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2016 were eligible (n = 842,072). Patellar resurfacing during TKR was performed in 36% (n = 305,844). The primary outcome was all-cause revision surgery. Secondary outcomes were the number of excess all-cause revisions associated with using TKRs without (versus with) patellar resurfacing, and the risk of re-revision after secondary patellar resurfacing. Results. The cumulative risk of all-cause revision at ten years was higher (p < 0.001) in primary TKRs without patellar resurfacing (3.54% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.47 to 3.62)) compared to those with resurfacing (3.00% (95% CI 2.91 to 3.11)). Using flexible parametric survival modelling, we estimated one ‘excess’ revision per 189 cases performed where the patella was not resurfaced by ten years (equivalent to 2,842 excess revisions in our cohort). The risk of all-cause re-revision following secondary patellar resurfacing was 4.6 times higher than the risk of revision after primary TKR with patellar resurfacing (at five years from secondary patellar resurfacing, 8.8% vs 1.9%). Conclusion. Performing TKR without patellar resurfacing was associated with an increased risk of revision. Secondary patellar resurfacing led to a high risk of re-revision. This represents a potential substantial healthcare burden that should be considered when forming treatment guidelines and commissioning services. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):864–871

Total knee replacement (TKR) is an effective method of treating end-stage arthritis of the knee. It is not, however, a procedure without risk due to a number of factors, one of which is diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this study was to estimate the general prevalence of diabetes in patients about to undergo primary TKR and to determine whether diabetes mellitus adversely affects the outcome. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. The Odds Ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were used to represent the estimate of risk of a specific outcome. Our results showed the prevalence of diabetes mellitus among patients undergoing TKR was 12.2%. Patients with diabetes mellitus had an increased risk of deep infection (OR = 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.38 to 1.88), deep vein thrombosis (in Asia, OR = 2.57, 95% CI, 1.58 to 4.20), periprosthetic fracture (OR = 1.89, 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.45), aseptic loosening (OR = 9.36, 95% CI, 4.63 to 18.90), and a poorer Knee Society function subscore (MD = -5.86, 95% CI, -10.27 to -1.46). Surgeons should advise patients specifically about these increased risks when obtaining informed consent and be meticulous about their peri-operative care. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1637–43

Primary arthroplasty may be denied to very elderly patients based upon the perceived outcome and risks associated with surgery. This prospective study compared the outcome, complications, and mortality of total hip (TKR) and total knee replacement (TKR) in a prospectively selected group of patients aged ≥ 80 years with that of a control group aged between 65 and 74 years. There were 171 and 495 THRs and 185 and 492 TKRs performed in the older and control groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the mean improvement of Oxford hip and knee scores between the groups at 12 months (0.98, (95% confidence interval (CI) −0.66 to 2.95), p = 0.34 and 1.15 (95% CI −0.65 to 2.94), p = 0.16, respectively). The control group had a significantly (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively) greater improvement in the physical well being component of their SF-12 score, but the older group was more satisfied with their THR (p = 0.047). The older group had a longer hospital stay for both THR (5.9 versus 9.0 days, p < 0.0001) and TKR (6.2 versus 8.3 days, p < 0.0001). The rates of post-operative complications and mortality were increased in the older group

Pre-operative variables are increasingly being used to determine eligibility for total knee replacement (TKR). This study was undertaken to evaluate the relationships, interactions and predictive capacity of variables available pre- and post-operatively on patient satisfaction following TKR. Using nationally collected patient reported outcome measures and data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales, we identified 22 798 patients who underwent TKR for osteoarthritis between August 2008 and September 2010. The ability of specific covariates to predict satisfaction was assessed using ordinal logistic regression and structural equational modelling. Only 4959 (22%) of 22 278 patients rated the results of their TKR as ‘excellent’, despite the majority (71%, n = 15 882) perceiving their knee symptoms to be much improved. The strongest predictors of satisfaction were post-operative variables. Satisfaction was significantly and positively related to the perception of symptom improvement (operative success) and the post-operative EuroQol-5D score. While also significant within the models pre-operative variables were less important and had a minimal influence upon post-operative satisfaction. The most robust predictions of satisfaction occurred only when both pre- and post-operative variables were considered together. These findings question the appropriateness of restricting access to care based on arbitrary pre-operative thresholds as these factors have little bearing on post-operative satisfaction. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1359–65

Between 1989 and 1992 we had 102 knees suitable for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). They were randomised to receive either a St Georg Sled UKR or a Kinematic modular total knee replacement (TKR). The early results demonstrated that the UKR group had less complications and more rapid rehabilitation than the TKR group. At five years there were an equal number of failures in the two groups but the UKR group had more excellent results and a greater range of movement. The cases were reviewed by a research nurse at 8, 10 and 12 years after operation. We report the outcome at 15 years follow-up. A total of 43 patients (45 knees) died with their prosthetic knees intact. Throughout the review period the Bristol knee scores of the UKR group have been better and at 15 years 15 (71.4%) of the surviving UKRs and 10 (52.6%) of the surviving TKRs had achieved an excellent score. The 15 years survivorship rate based on revision or failure for any reason was 24 (89.8%) for UKR and 19 (78.7%) for TKR. During the 15 years of the review four UKRs and six TKRs failed. The better early results with UKR are maintained at 15 years with no greater failure rate. The median Bristol knee score of the UKR group was 91.1 at five years and 92 at 15 years, suggesting little functional deterioration in either the prosthesis or the remainder of the joint. These results justify the increased use of UKR

Objectives. To define Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for the Oxford hip score (OHS) and Oxford knee score (OKS) at mid-term follow-up. Methods. In a prospective multicentre cohort study, OHS and OKS were collected at a mean follow-up of three years (1.5 to 6.0), combined with a numeric rating scale (NRS) for satisfaction and an external validation question assessing the patient’s willingness to undergo surgery again. A total of 550 patients underwent total hip replacement (THR) and 367 underwent total knee replacement (TKR). Results. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves identified a PASS threshold of 42 for the OHS after THR and 37 for the OKS after TKR. THR patients with an OHS ≥ 42 and TKR patients with an OKS ≥ 37 had a higher NRS for satisfaction and a greater likelihood of being willing to undergo surgery again. Conclusions. PASS thresholds appear larger at mid-term follow-up than at six months after surgery. With- out external validation, we would advise against using these PASS thresholds as absolute thresholds in defining whether or not a patient has attained an acceptable symptom state after THR or TKR. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:7–13

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

Total knee replacement (TKR) is one of the most common operations in orthopaedic surgery worldwide. Despite its scientific reputation as mainly successful, only 81% to 89% of patients are satisfied with the final result. Our understanding of this discordance between patient and surgeon satisfaction is limited. In our experience, focus on five major factors can improve patient satisfaction rates: correct patient selection, setting of appropriate expectations, avoiding preventable complications, knowledge of the finer points of the operation, and the use of both pre- and post-operative pathways. Awareness of the existence, as well as the identification of predictors of patient–surgeon discordance should potentially help with enhancing patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:120–3

The strain on clinic and surgeon resources resulting from a rise in demand for total knee replacement (TKR) requires reconsideration of when and how often patients need to be seen for follow-up. Surgeons will otherwise require increased paramedical staff or need to limit the number of TKRs they undertake. We reviewed the outcome data of 16 414 primary TKRs undertaken at our centre to determine the time to re-operation for any reason and for specific failure mechanisms. Peak risk years for failure were determined by comparing the conditional probability of failure, the number of failures divided by the total number of TKRs cases, for each year. The median times to failure for the most common failure mechanisms were 4.9 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1.7 to 10.7) for femoral and tibial loosening, 1.9 years (IQR 0.8 to 3.9) for infection, 3.1 years (IQR 1.6 to 5.5) for tibial collapse and 5.6 years (IQR 3.4 to 9.3) for instability. The median time to failure for all revisions was 3.3 years (IQR 1.2 to 8.5), with an overall revision rate of 1.7% (n = 282). Results from our patient population suggest that patients be seen for follow-up at six months, one year, three years, eight years, 12 years, and every five years thereafter. Patients with higher pain in the early post-operative period or high body mass index (≥ 41 kg/m. 2. ) should be monitored more closely. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1484–9

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

Peri-prosthetic fracture after joint replacement in the lower limb is associated with significant morbidity. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) over a ten-year period using a population-based linked dataset. Between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 2008, 52 136 primary THRs, 8726 revision THRs, 44 511 primary TKRs, and 3222 revision TKRs were performed. Five years post-operatively, the rate of fracture was 0.9% after primary THR, 4.2% after revision THR, 0.6% after primary TKR and 1.7% after revision TKR. Comparison of survival analysis for all primary and revision arthroplasties showed peri-prosthetic fractures were more likely in females, patients aged > 70 and after revision arthroplasty. Female patients aged > 70 should be warned of a significantly increased risk of peri-prosthetic fracture after hip or knee replacement. The use of adjuvant medical treatment to reduce the effect of peri-prosthetic osteoporosis may be a direction of research for these patients

Satisfaction is increasingly employed as an outcome measure for a successful total knee replacement (TKR). Satisfaction as an outcome measure encompasses many different intrinsic and extrinsic factors related to a person’s experience before and after TKR. The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry has previously demonstrated on a large population study that 17% of TKR recipients are not satisfied with their TKR outcome. This finding has been replicated in other countries. Similar significant factors emerged from these registry studies that are related to satisfaction. It would appear that satisfaction is better after more chronic diseases and whether the TKR results in pain relief or improved function. Importantly, unmet pre-operative expectations are a significant predictor for dissatisfaction following a TKR. It may be possible to improve rates by addressing the issues surrounding pain, function and expectation before embarking on surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:148–52

Total knee replacement (TKR) is an operation that can be performed with or without the use of a tourniquet. Meta-analyses of the available Level-1 studies have demonstrated that the use of a tourniquet leads to a significant reduction in blood loss. The opponents for use of a tourniquet cite development of complications such as skin bruising, neurovascular injury, and metabolic disturbance as drawbacks. Although there may certainly be reason for concern in arteriopathic patients, there is little evidence that routine use of a tourniquet during TKR results in any of the above complications. The use of a tourniquet, on the other hand, provides a bloodless field that allows the surgeon to perform the procedure with expediency and optimal visualisation. Blood conservation has gained great importance in recent years due to increased understanding of the problems associated with blood transfusion, such as increased surgical site infection (due to immunomodulation effect), increased length of hospital stay and increased cost. Based on the authors’ understanding of the available evidence, the routine use of a tourniquet during TKR is justified as good surgical practice. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:133–4

At least four ways have been described to determine femoral component rotation, and three ways to determine tibial component rotation in total knee replacement (TKR). Each method has its advocates and each has an influence on knee kinematics and the ultimate short and long term success of TKR. Of the four femoral component methods, the author prefers rotating the femoral component in flexion to that amount that establishes a stable symmetrical flexion gap. This judgement is made after the soft tissues of the knee have been balanced in extension. Of the three tibial component methods, the author prefers rotating the tibial component into congruency with the established femoral component rotation with the knee is in extension. This yields a rotationally congruent articulation during weight-bearing and should minimise the torsional forces being transferred through a conforming tibial insert, which could lead to wear to the underside of the tibial polyethylene. Rotating platform components will compensate for any mal-rotation, but can still lead to pain if excessive tibial insert rotation causes soft-tissue impingement. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:140–3

A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing primary cementless total knee replacement (TKR) using porous tantalum performed by a group of surgical trainees. Clinical and radiological follow-up involved 79 females and 26 males encompassing 115 knees. The mean age was 66.9 years (36 to 85). Mean follow-up was 7 years (2 to 11). Tibial and patellar components were porous tantalum monoblock implants, and femoral components were posterior stabilised (PS) in design with cobalt–chromium fibre mesh. Radiological assessments were made for implant positioning, alignment, radiolucencies, lysis, and loosening. There was 95.7% survival of implants. There was no radiological evidence of loosening and no osteolysis found. No revisions were performed for aseptic loosening. Average tibial component alignment was 1.4° of varus (4°of valgus to 9° varus), and 6.2° (3° anterior to 15° posterior) of posterior slope. Mean femoral component alignment was 6.6° (1° to 11°) of valgus. Mean tibiofemoral alignment was 5.6° of valgus (7° varus to 16° valgus). Patellar tilt was a mean of 2.4° lateral (5° medial to 28° lateral). Patient satisfaction with improvement in pain was 91%. Cementless TKR incorporating porous tantalum yielded good clinical and radiological outcomes at a mean of follow-up of seven-years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):87–92

We conducted a retrospective study to investigate the effect of femoral bowing on the placement of components in total knee replacement (TKR), with regard to its effect on reestablishing the correct mechanical axis, as we hypothesised that computer-assisted total knee replacement (CAS-TKR) would produce more accurate alignment than conventional TKR. Between January 2006 and December 2009, 212 patients (306 knees) underwent TKR. The conventional TKR was compared with CAS-TKR for accuracy of placement of the components and post-operative alignment, as determined by five radiological measurements. There were significant differences in the reconstructed mechanical axes between the bowed and the non-bowed group after conventional TKR (176.2° (. sd. 3.4) vs 179.3° (. sd. 2.1), p < 0.001). For patients with significant femoral bowing, the reconstructed mechanical axes were significantly closer to normal in the CAS group than in the conventional group (179.2° (. sd. 1.9) vs 176.2° (. sd. 3.4), p < 0.001). Femoral bowing resulted in inaccuracy when a conventional technique was used. CAS-TKR provides an effective method of restoring the mechanical axis in the presence of significant femoral bowing

We have compared the time to recovery of isokinetic quadriceps strength after total knee replacement (TKR) using three different lengths of incision in the quadriceps. We prospectively randomised 60 patients into one of the three groups according to the length of incision in the quadriceps above the upper border of the patella (2 cm, 4 cm or 6 cm). The strength of the knees was measured pre-operatively and every month post-operatively until the peak quadriceps torque returned to its pre-operative level. There was no significant difference in the mean operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, alignment or pre-operative isokinetic quadriceps strength between the three groups. Using the Kaplan–Meier method, group A had a similar mean recovery time to group B (2.0 ± 0.2 vs 2.5 ± 0.2 months, p = 0.176). Group C required a significantly longer recovery time (3.4 ± 0.3 months) than the other groups (p < 0.03). However, there were no significant differences in the mean Oxford knee scores one year post-operatively between the groups. We conclude that an incision of up to 4 cm in the quadriceps does not delay the recovery of its isokinetic strength after TKR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:902–6

We identified a group of patients from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register who reported no relief of pain or worse pain one year after a total knee replacement (TKR). A total of two different patient-reported pain scores were used during this process. We then evaluated how the instruments used to measure pain affected the number of patients who reported no relief of pain or worse pain, and the relative effect of potential risk factors. . Between 2008 and 2010, 2883 TKRs were performed for osteoarthritis in two Swedish arthroplasty units. After applying exclusion criteria, 2123 primary TKRs (2123 patients) were included in the study. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for knee pain were used to assess patients pre-operatively and one year post-operatively. . Only 50 of the 220 patients (23%) who reported no pain relief on either the KOOS pain subscale or the VAS for knee pain did so with both of these instruments. Patients who reported no pain relief on either measure tended to have less pain pre-operatively but a higher degree of anxiety. Charnley category C was a predictor for not gaining pain relief as measured on a VAS for knee pain. . The number of patients who are not relieved of pain after a TKR differs considerably depending on the instrument used to measure pain. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1222–6