This is a 15-year follow-up observational study of 4390 patients with 4606 primary total knee replacements (TKRs) implanted in the Trent health region between 1990 and 1992. The operations were performed in 21 hospitals, including both district general and teaching hospitals, with 77 different surgeons as named consultant. The main objective was to analyse the survival of the patients and of the prostheses, and to evaluate what impact different variables have on survival. In addition, the 1480 patients (33.7%) (1556 TKRs) alive at 15 years following operation were sent a self-administered questionnaire which examined their level of satisfaction, of pain, and their quality of life at 15 years. Completed responses were received from 912 TKRs (58.6%). Three survival curves were constructed: a best-case scenario based on the patients entered into the life tables, another included failures not reported in the revision database, and a third worst-case scenario based on all patients lost to follow-up presumed to have had a failed primary TKR. In the best-case scenario survival at 15 years was 92.2%, and in the worst-case scenario was 81.1%. Survival was significantly increased in women and older patients (Mantel-Cox log-rank test, p <
0.005 and p <
0.001, respectively). Revision as a result of infection was required in 40 TKRs (18.8%) representing 0.87% of the original cohort. The limited information available from the questionnaire indicated that satisfaction was less frequent among men, patients with osteoarthritis and those who required revision (chi-squared test, p <
0.05, p <
0.05 and p <
0.0001, respectively). With regard to pain, older patients, females and patients who still had their primary replacement in place at 15 years, reported the least pain (chi-squared test for trends, p <
0.0005, p <
0.005 and p <
0.0001, respectively). The reported quality of life was not affected by any variable.
As part of a prospective study of 476 total knee replacements (TKR), we evaluated the use of manipulation under anaesthesia in 47 knees. Manipulation was considered when intensive physiotherapy failed to increase flexion to more than 80°. The mean time from arthroplasty to manipulation was 11.3 weeks (median 9, range 2 to 41). The mean active flexion before manipulation was 62° (35 to 80). One year later the mean gain was 33° (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, range −5 to 70, 95% CI 28.5 to 38.5). Definite sustained gains in flexion were achieved even when manipulation was performed four or more months after arthroplasty (paired A further 21 patients who met our criteria for manipulation declined the procedure. Despite continued physiotherapy, there was no significant increase in flexion in their knees. Six weeks to one year after TKR, the mean change was 3.1° (paired
Early implants for total knee replacement were fixed to bone with cement. No firm scientific reason has been given for the introduction of cementless knee replacement and the long-term survivorship of such implants has not shown any advantage over cemented forms. In a randomised, prospective study we have compared cemented and uncemented total knee replacement and report the results of 139 prostheses at five years. Outcome was assessed both clinically by independent examination using the Nottingham knee score and radiologically using the Knee Society scoring system. Independent statistical analysis of the data showed no significant difference between cemented and cementless fixation for pain, mobility or movement. There was no difference in the radiological alignment at five years, but there was a notable disparity in the radiolucent line score. With cemented fixation there was a significantly greater number of radiolucent lines on anteroposterior radiographs of the tibia and lateral radiographs of the femur. At five years, our clinical results would not support the use of the more expensive cementless fixation whereas the radiological results are of unknown significance. Longer follow-up will determine any changes in the results and conclusions.
