Aims. Patient dissatisfaction following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with manual jig-based instruments has been reported to be as high as 30%. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has been increasingly used in an effort to improve patient outcomes, however there is a paucity of literature examining patient satisfaction after RA-TKA. This study aims to identify the incidence of patients who were not satisfied following RA-TKA and to determine factors associated with higher levels of dissatisfaction. Methods. This was a retrospective review of 674 patients who underwent primary TKA between October 2016 and September 2020 with a minimum two-year follow-up. A five-point Likert satisfaction score was used to place patients into two groups: Group A were those who were very dissatisfied, dissatisfied, or neutral (Likert score 1 to 3) and Group B were those who were satisfied or very satisfied (Likert score 4 to 5). Patient demographic data, as well as preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, were compared between groups. Results. Overall, 45 patients (6.7%) were in Group A and 629 (93.3%) were in Group B. Group A (vs Group B) had a higher proportion of male sex (p = 0.008), preoperative chronic opioid use (p < 0.001), preoperative psychotropic medication use (p = 0.01), prior anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (p < 0.001), and preoperative symptomatic lumbar spine disease (p = 0.004). Group A was also younger (p = 0.023). Multivariate analysis revealed preoperative opioid use (p = 0.012), prior ACL reconstruction (p = 0.038), male sex (p = 0.006), and preoperative psychotropic medication use (p = 0.001) as independent predictive factors of patient dissatisfaction. Conclusion. The use of RA-TKA demonstrated a high rate of patient satisfaction (629 of 674, 93.3%). Demographics for patients not satisfied following RA-TKA included: male sex, chronic opioid use, chronic psychotropic medication use, and prior ACL reconstruction. Patients in these groups should be identified preoperatively and educated on realistic expectations given their comorbid conditions. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(9):758–765

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.

Aims. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers accurate and reproducible guidance in component positioning and assessment of soft-tissue tensioning during knee arthroplasty, but the feasibility and early outcomes when using this technology for revision surgery remain unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic arm-assisted revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus primary robotic arm-assisted TKA at short-term follow-up. Methods. This prospective study included 16 patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA versus 35 matched patients receiving robotic arm-assisted primary TKA. In all study patients, the following data were recorded: operating time, polyethylene liner size, change in haemoglobin concentration (g/dl), length of inpatient stay, postoperative complications, and hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment. All procedures were performed using the principles of functional alignment. At most recent follow-up, range of motion (ROM), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were collected. Mean follow-up time was 21 months (6 to 36). Results. There were no differences between the two treatment groups with regard to mean change in haemoglobin concentration (p = 0.477), length of stay (LOS, p = 0.172), mean polyethylene thickness (p = 0.065), or postoperative complication rates (p = 0.295). At the most recent follow-up, the primary robotic arm-assisted TKA group had a statistically significantly improved OKS compared with the revision UKA to TKA group (44.6 (SD 2.7) vs 42.3 (SD 2.5); p = 0.004) but there was no difference in the overall ROM (p = 0.056) or FJS between the two treatment groups (86.1 (SD 9.6) vs 84.1 (4.9); p = 0.439). Conclusion. Robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA was associated with comparable intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative rehabilitation, functional outcomes, and complications to primary robotic TKA at short-term follow-up. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers a safe and reproducible technique for revising failed UKA to TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):680–687

Aims. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylactic treatments in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. Using nationwide medical registries, we identified patients with a primary TKA performed in Denmark between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018 who received thromboprophylactic treatment. We examined the 90-day risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, and all-cause mortality following surgery. We used a Cox regression model to compute hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome, pairwise comparing treatment with dalteparin or dabigatran with rivaroxaban as the reference. The HRs were both computed using a multivariable and a propensity score matched analysis. Results. We identified 27,736 primary TKA patients who received thromboprophylactic treatment (rivaroxaban (n = 18,846); dalteparin (n = 5,767); dabigatran (n = 1,443); tinzaparin (n = 1,372); and enoxaparin (n = 308)). In the adjusted multivariable analysis and compared with rivaroxaban, treatment with dalteparin (HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.92)) or dabigatran (HR 0.31 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.70)) was associated with a decreased risk of VTE. No statistically significant differences were observed for major bleeding or all-cause mortality. The propensity score matched analysis yielded similar results. Conclusion. Treatment with dalteparin or dabigatran was associated with a decreased 90-day risk of VTE following primary TKA surgery compared with treatment with rivaroxaban. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(10):1571–1577

Aims. The purpose of this study was to assess mid-term survivorship following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with Optetrak Logic components and identify the most common revision indications at a single institution. Methods. We identified a retrospective cohort of 7,941 Optetrak primary TKAs performed from January 2010 to December 2018. We reviewed the intraoperative findings of 369 TKAs that required revision TKA from January 2010 to December 2021 and the details of the revision implants used. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survivorship. Cox regression analysis was used to examine the impact of patient variables and year of implantation on survival time. Results. The estimated survivorship free of all-cause revision was 98% (95% confidence interval (CI) 97% to 98%), 95% (95% CI 95% to 96%), and 86% (95% CI 83% to 88%) at two, five, and ten years, respectively. In 209/369 revisions there was a consistent constellation of findings with varying severity that included polyethylene wear and associated synovitis, osteolysis, and component loosening. This failure mode, which we refer to as aseptic mechanical failure, was the most common revision indication. The mean time from primary TKA to revision for aseptic mechanical failure was five years (5 months to 11 years). Conclusion. In this series of nearly 8,000 primary TKAs performed with a specific implant, we identified a lower-than-expected mid-term survivorship and a high number of revisions with a unique presentation. This study, along with the recent recall of the implant, confirms the need for frequent monitoring of patients with Optetrak TKAs given the incidence of polyethylene failure, osteolysis, and component loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):277–283

Aims. Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) remains an effective intervention to address restricted range of motion (ROM) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and occurs in 2% to 3% of primary TKAs at our institution. Since there are few data on the outcomes of MUA with different anaesthetic methods, we sought to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing MUA with intravenous (IV) sedation and neuraxial anaesthesia. Methods. We identified 548 MUAs after primary TKA (136 IV sedation, 412 neuraxial anaesthesia plus IV sedation) from March 2016 to July 2019. The mean age of this cohort was 62 years (35 to 88) with a mean body mass index of 31 kg/m. 2. (18 to 49). The mean time from primary TKA to MUA was 10.2 weeks (6.2 to 24.3). Pre-MUA ROM was similar between groups; overall mean pre-MUA extension was 4.2° (p = 0.452) and mean pre-MUA flexion was 77° (p = 0.372). We compared orthopaedic complications, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, length of stay (LOS), and immediate and three-month follow-up knee ROM between these groups. Results. Following MUA, patients with IV sedation had higher mean VAS pain scores of 5.2 (SD 1.8) compared to 4.1 (SD = 1.5) in the neuraxial group (p < 0.001). The mean LOS was shorter in patients that received IV sedation (9.5 hours (4 to 31)) compared to neuraxial anaesthesia (11.9 hours (4 to 51)) (p = 0.009), but an unexpected overnight stay was similar in each group (8.6%). Immediate-post MUA ROM was 1° to 121° in the IV sedation group and 0.9° to 123° in the neuraxial group (p = 0.313). Three-month follow-up ROM was 2° to 108° in the IV sedation group and 1.9° to 110° in the neuraxial anaesthesia group (p = 0.325) with a mean loss of 13° (ranging from 5° gain to 60° loss), in both groups by three months. No patients in either group sustained a complication. Conclusion. IV sedation alone and neuraxial anaesthesia are both effective anaesthetic methods for MUA after primary TKA. Surgeons and anaesthetists should offer these anaesthetic techniques to match patient-specific needs as the orthopaedic outcomes are similar. Also, patients should be counselled that ROM following MUA may decrease over time. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):126–130

Introduction. The primary aim of this study was to describe a baseline comparison of early knee-specific functional outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using metaphyseal sleeves with a matched cohort of patients undergoing primary TKA. The secondary aim was to compare incidence of complications and length of stay (LOS) between the two groups. Methods. Patients undergoing revision TKA for all diagnoses between 2009 and 2016 had patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected prospectively. PROMs consisted of the American Knee Society Score (AKSS) and Short-Form 12 (SF-12). The study cohort was identified retrospectively and demographics were collected. The cohort was matched to a control group of patients undergoing primary TKA. Results. Overall, 72 patients underwent revision TKA and were matched with 72 primary TKAs with a mean follow-up of 57 months (standard deviation (SD) 20 months). The only significant difference in postoperative PROMs was a worse AKSS pain score in the revision group (36 vs 44, p = 0.002); however, these patients still produced an improvement in the pain score. There was no significant difference in improvement of AKSS or SF-12 between the two groups. LOS (9.3 days vs 4.6 days) and operation time (1 hour 56 minutes vs 1 hour 7 minutes) were significantly higher in the revision group (p < 0.001). Patients undergoing revision were significantly more likely to require intraoperative lateral release and postoperative urinary catheterisation (p < 0.001). Conclusion. This matched-cohort study provides results of revision TKA using modern techniques and implants and outlines what results patients can expect to achieve using primary TKA as a control. This should be useful to clinicians counselling patients for revision TKA

Aims. Spinal anaesthesia has seen increased use in contemporary primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). However, controversy exists about the benefits of spinal in comparison to general anaesthesia in primary TKAs. This study aimed to investigate the pain control, length of stay (LOS), and complications associated with spinal versus general anaesthesia in primary TKAs from a single, high-volume academic centre. Methods. We retrospectively identified 17,690 primary TKAs (13,297 patients) from 2001 to 2016 using our institutional total joint registry, where 52% had general anaesthesia and 48% had spinal anaesthesia. Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts with a mean age of 68 years (SD 10), 58% female (n = 7,669), and mean BMI of 32 kg/m. 2. (SD 7). Pain was evaluated using oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) and numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) data. Complications including 30- and 90-day readmissions were studied. Data were analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted model based on propensity score that included many patient and surgical factors. Mean follow-up was seven years (2 to 18). Results. Patients treated with spinal anaesthesia required fewer postoperative OMEs (p < 0.001) and had lower NPRS scores (p < 0.001). Spinal anaesthesia also had fewer cases of altered mental status (AMS; odds ratio (OR) 1.3; p = 0.044), as well as 30-day (OR 1.4; p < 0.001) and 90-day readmissions (OR 1.5; p < 0.001). General anaesthesia was associated with increased risk of any revision (OR 1.2; p = 0.021) and any reoperation (1.3; p < 0.001). Conclusion. In the largest single institutional report to date, we found that spinal anaesthesia was associated with significantly lower OME use, lower risk of AMS, and lower overall 30- and 90-day readmissions following primary TKAs. Additionally, spinal anaesthesia was associated with reduced risk of any revision and any reoperation after accounting for numerous patient and operative factors. When possible and safe, spinal anaesthesia should be considered in primary TKAs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1209–1214

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. This study aims to determine difference in annual rate of early-onset (≤ 90 days) deep surgical site infection (SSI) following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for osteoarthritis, and to identify risk factors that may be associated with infection. Methods. This is a retrospective population-based cohort study using prospectively collected patient-level data between 1 January 2013 and 1 March 2020. The diagnosis of deep SSI was defined as per the Centers for Disease Control/National Healthcare Safety Network criteria. The Mann-Kendall Trend test was used to detect monotonic trends in annual rates of early-onset deep SSI over time. Multiple logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of different patient, surgical, and healthcare setting factors on the risk of developing a deep SSI within 90 days from surgery for patients with complete data. We also report 90-day mortality. Results. A total of 39,038 patients underwent primary TKA for osteoarthritis during the study period. Of these, 275 patients developed a deep SSI within 90 days of surgery, representing a cumulative incidence of 0.7%. The annual infection rate did not significantly decrease over the seven-year study period (p = 0.162). Overall, 13,885 (35.5%) cases were excluded from the risk analysis due to missing data. Risk factors associated with early-onset deep SSI included male sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≥ 3, blood transfusion, acute length of stay, and surgeon volume < 30 TKAs/year. Early-onset deep SSI was not associated with increased 90-day mortality. Conclusion. This study establishes a reliable baseline infection rate for early-onset deep SSI after TKA for osteoarthritis using robust Infection Prevention and Control surveillance data, and identifies several potentially modifiable risk factors. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(9):971–976

Aims. Varus-valgus constrained (VVC) devices are typically used in revision settings, often with stems to mitigate the risk of aseptic loosening. However, in at least one system, the VVC insert is compatible with the primary posterior-stabilized (PS) femoral component, which may be an option in complex primary situations. We sought to determine the implant survivorship, radiological and clinical outcomes, and complications when this VVC insert was coupled with a PS femur without stems in complex primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). Methods. Through our institution’s total joint registry, we identified 113 primary TKAs (103 patients) performed between 2007 and 2017 in which a VVC insert was coupled with a standard cemented PS femur without stems. Mean age was 68 years (SD 10), mean BMI was 32 kg/m. 2. (SD 7), and 59 patients (50%) were male. Mean follow-up was four years (2 to 10). Results. The five-year survivorship free from aseptic loosening was 100%. The five-year survivorship free from any revision was 99%, with the only revision performed for infection. The five-year survivorship free from reoperation was 93%. The most common reoperation was treatment for infection (n = 4; 4%), followed by manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA; n = 2; 2%). Survivorship free from any complication at five years was 90%, with superficial wound infection as the most frequent (n = 4; 4%). At most recent follow-up, two TKAs had non-progressive radiolucent lines about both the tibial and femoral components. Knee Society Scores improved from 53 preoperatively to 88 at latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion. For complex primary TKA in occasional situations, coupling a VVC insert with a standard PS femur without stems proved reliable and durable at five years. Longer-term follow-up is required before recommending this technique more broadly. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):921–925

Aims. Despite recent literature questioning their use, vancomycin and clindamycin often substitute cefazolin as the preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), especially in the setting of documented allergy to penicillin. Topical povidone-iodine lavage and vancomycin powder (VIP) are adjuncts that may further broaden antimicrobial coverage, and have shown some promise in recent investigations. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to compare the risk of acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in primary TKA patients who received cefazolin and VIP to those who received a non-cephalosporin alternative and VIP. Methods. This was a retrospective cohort study of 11,550 primary TKAs performed at an orthopaedic hospital between 2013 and 2019. The primary outcome was PJI occurring within 90 days of surgery. Patients were stratified into two groups (cefazolin vs non-cephalosporin) based on their preoperative antibiotic. All patients also received the VIP protocol at wound closure. Bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to control for potential confounders and identify the odds ratio of PJI. Results. In all, 10,484 knees (90.8%) received cefazolin, while 1,066 knees (9.2%) received a non-cephalosporin agent (either vancomycin or clindamycin) as preoperative prophylaxis. The rate of PJI in the cefazolin group (0.5%; 48/10,484) was significantly lower than the rate of PJI in the non-cephalosporin group (1.0%; 11/1,066) (p = 0.012). After controlling for confounding variables, the odds ratio (OR) of developing a PJI was increased in the non-cephalosporin cohort compared to the cefazolin cohort (OR 2.389; 1.2 to 4.6); p = 0.01). Conclusion. Despite the use of topical irrigant solutions and addition of local antimicrobial agents, the use of a non-cephalosporin perioperative antibiotic continues to be associated with a greater risk of TKA PJI compared to cefazolin. Strategies that increase the proportion of patients receiving cefazolin rather than non-cephalosporin alternatives must be emphasized. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(1):35–41

Aims. Rates of readmission and reoperation following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are under scrutiny due to new payment models, which penalize these negative outcomes. Some risk factors are more modifiable than others, and some conditions considered modifiable such as obesity may not be as modifiable in the setting of advanced arthritis as many propose. We sought to determine whether controlling for hypoalbuminaemia would mitigate the effect that prior authors had identified in patients with obesity. Methods. We reviewed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database for the period of January 2008 to December 2016 to evaluate the rates of reoperation and readmission within 30 days following primary TKA. Multivariate logistic regression modelling controlled for preoperative albumin, age, sex, and comorbidity status. Results. Readmission rates only differed significantly between patients with Normal Weight and Obesity Class II, with a decreased rate of readmission in this group (odds ratio (OR) 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.96; p = 0.010). The only group demonstrating association with increased risk of reoperation within 30 days was the Obesity Class III group (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.82; p = 0.022). Hypoalbuminaemia (preoperative albumin < 35 g/L) was significantly associated with readmission (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.86; p < 0.001) and reoperation (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.96; p = 0.001) within 30 days. Conclusion. In this study, hypoalbuminaemia appears to be a more significant risk factor for readmission and reoperation than even the highest obesity categories. Future studies may assess whether preoperative albumin restoration or weight loss may improve outcomes for patients with hypoalbuminaemia. The implications of this study may allow surgeons to discuss risk of surgery with obese patients planning to undergo primary TKA procedures if other comorbidities are adequately controlled. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):31–35

Aims. Enhanced perioperative protocols have significantly improved patient recovery following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Little has been investigated the effectiveness of these protocols for revision TKA (RTKA). We report on a matched group of aseptic revision and primary TKA patients treated with an identical pain and rehabilitation programmes. Methods. Overall, 40 aseptic full-component RTKA patients were matched (surgical date, age, sex, and body mass index (BMI)) to a group of primary cemented TKA patients. All RTKAs had new uncemented stemmed femoral and tibial components with metaphyseal sleeves. Both groups were treated with an identical postoperative pain protocol. Patients were followed for at least two years. Knee Society Scores (KSS) at six weeks and at final follow-up were recorded for both groups. Results. There was no difference in mean length of stay between the primary TKA (1.2 days (0.83 to 2.08)) and RTKA patients (1.4 days (0.91 to 2.08). Mean oral morphine milligram (mg) equivalent dosing (MED) during the hospitalization was 42 mg/day for the primary TKA and 38 mg/day for the RTKA groups. There were two readmissions: gastrointestinal disturbance (RTKA) and urinary retention (primary TKA). There no were reoperations, wound problems, thromboembolic events or manipulations in either group. Mean overall KSS for the RTKA group was 87.3 (45 to 99) at six-week follow-up and 89.1 (52 to 100) at final follow-up (mean 3.9 years, (3.9 to 9.0)). Mean overall KSS for the primary group was 89.9 (71 to 100) at six-week follow-up and 93.42 (73 to 100) at final follow-up (mean 3.5 years (2.5 to 9.2)). Conclusion. An identical pain and rehabilitation protocol used for primary TKA patients can enable certain full-component aseptic RTKA patients to have a similar early functional outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):96–100

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

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine if the local delivery of vancomycin and tobramycin in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can achieve intra-articular concentrations exceeding the minimum inhibitory concentration thresholds for bacteria causing acute prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods. Using a retrospective single-institution database of all primary TKAs performed between January 1 2014 and May 7 2019, we identified patients with acute PJI that were managed surgically within 90 days of the initial procedure. The organisms from positive cultures obtained at the time of revision were tested for susceptibility to gentamicin, tobramycin, and vancomycin. A prospective study was then performed to determine the intra-articular antibiotic concentration on postoperative day one after primary TKA using one of five local antibiotic delivery strategies with tobramycin and/or vancomycin mixed into the polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) or vancomycin powder. Results. A total of 19 patients with acute PJI after TKA were identified and 29 unique bacterial isolates were recovered. The mean time to revision was 37 days (6 to 84). Nine isolates (31%) were resistant to gentamicin, ten (34%) were resistant to tobramycin, and seven (24%) were resistant to vancomycin. Excluding one Fusobacterium nucleatum, which was resistant to all three antibiotics, all isolates resistant to tobramycin or gentamicin were susceptible to vancomycin and vice versa. Overall, 2.4 g of tobramycin hand-mixed into 80 g of PMMA and 1 g of intra-articular vancomycin powder consistently achieved concentrations above the minimum inhibitory concentrations of susceptible organisms. Conclusion. One-third of bacteria causing acute PJI after primary TKA were resistant to the aminoglycosides commonly mixed into PMMA, and one-quarter were resistant to vancomycin. With one exception, all bacteria resistant to tobramycin were susceptible to vancomycin and vice versa. Based on these results, the optimal cover for organisms causing most cases of acute PJI after TKA can be achieved with a combination of tobramycin mixed in antibiotic cement, and vancomycin powder. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):163–169

Aims. There is little information regarding the risk of a patient developing prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) when the patient has previously experienced PJI of a TKA or total hip arthroplasty (THA) in another joint. The goal of this study was to compare the risk of PJI of primary TKA in this patient population against matched controls. Patients and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 95 patients (102 primary TKAs) treated between 2000 and 2014 with a history of PJI in another TKA or THA. A total of 50 patients (53%) were female. Mean age was 69 years (45 to 88) with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 36 kg/m. 2. (22 to 59). In total, 27% of patients were on chronic antibiotic suppression. Mean follow-up was six years (2 to 16). We 1:3 matched these (for age, sex, BMI, and surgical year) to 306 primary TKAs performed in 306 patients with a THA or TKA of another joint without a subsequent PJI. Competing risk with death was used for statistical analysis. Multivariate analysis was followed to evaluate risk factors for PJI in the study cohort. Results. The cumulative incidence of PJI in the study cohort (6.1%) was significantly higher than the matched cohort (2.6%) at ten years (hazard ratio (HR) 3.3; 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 8.97; p = 0.02). Host grade in the study group was not a significant risk factor for PJI. Patients on chronic suppression had a higher rate of PJI (HR 15; p = 0.002), with six of the seven patients developing PJI in the study group being on chronic suppression. The new infecting microorganism was the same as the previous in only two of seven patients. Conclusion. In this matched cohort study, patients undergoing a clean primary TKA with a history of TKA or THA PJI in another joint had a three-fold higher risk of PJI compared with matched controls with ten-year cumulative incidence of 6.1%. The risk of PJI was 15-fold higher in patients on chronic antibiotic suppression; further investigation into reasons for this and mitigation strategies are recommended. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(7 Supple C):91–97

Primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a reliable procedure with reproducible long-term results. Nevertheless, there are conditions related to the type of patient or local conditions of the knee that can make it a difficult procedure. The most common scenarios that make it difficult are discussed in this review. These include patients with many previous operations and incisions, and those with severe coronal deformities, genu recurvatum, a stiff knee, extra-articular deformities and those who have previously undergone osteotomy around the knee and those with chronic dislocation of the patella. Each condition is analysed according to the characteristics of the patient, the pre-operative planning and the reported outcomes. . When approaching the difficult primary TKA surgeons should use a systematic approach, which begins with the review of the existing literature for each specific clinical situation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):30–9

The optimum cementing technique for the tibial component in cemented primary total knee replacement (TKR) remains controversial. The technique of cementing, the volume of cement and the penetration are largely dependent on the operator, and hence large variations can occur. Clinical, experimental and computational studies have been performed, with conflicting results. Early implant migration is an indication of loosening. Aseptic loosening is the most common cause of failure in primary TKR and is the product of several factors. Sufficient penetration of cement has been shown to increase implant stability. This review discusses the relevant literature regarding all aspects of the cementing of the tibial component at primary TKR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:295–300

Aims. It has been shown that the preoperative modification of risk factors associated with obesity may reduce complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the optimal method of doing so remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a preoperative Risk Stratification Tool (RST) devised in our institution could reduce unexpected intensive care unit (ICU) transfers and 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and reoperations after TKA in obese patients. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 1,614 consecutive patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA. Their mean age was 65.1 years (17.9 to 87.7) and the mean BMI was 34.2 kg/m. 2. (SD 7.7). All patients underwent perioperative optimization and monitoring using the RST, which is a validated calculation tool that provides a recommendation for postoperative ICU care or increased nursing support. Patients were divided into three groups: non-obese (BMI < 30 kg/m. 2. , n = 512); obese (BMI 30 kg/m. 2. to 39.9 kg/m. 2. , n = 748); and morbidly obese (BMI > 40 kg/m. 2. , n = 354). Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the outcomes among the groups adjusted for age, sex, smoking, and diabetes. Results. Obese patients had a significantly increased rate of discharge to a rehabilitation facility compared with non-obese patients (38.7% (426/1,102) vs 26.0% (133/512), respectively; p < 0.001). When stratified by BMI, discharge to a rehabilitation facility remained significantly higher compared with non-obese (26.0% (133)) in both obese (34.2% (256), odds ratio (OR) 1.6) and morbidly obese (48.0% (170), OR 3.1) patients (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in unexpected ICU transfer (0.4% (two) non-obese vs 0.9% (seven) obese (OR 2.5) vs 1.7% (six) morbidly obese (OR 5.4); p = 0.054), visits to the ED (8.6% (44) vs 10.3% (77) (OR 1.3) vs 10.5% (37) (OR 1.2); p = 0.379), readmissions (4.5% (23) vs 4.0% (30) (OR 1.0) vs 5.1% (18) (OR 1.4); p = 0.322), or reoperations (2.5% (13) vs 3.3% (25) (OR 1.2) vs 3.1% (11) (OR 0.9); p = 0.939). Conclusion. With the use of a preoperative RST, morbidly obese patients had similar rates of short-term postoperative adverse outcomes after primary TKA as non-obese patients. This supports the assertion that morbidly obese patients can safely undergo TKA with appropriate perioperative optimization and monitoring. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):45–50