Large multiplanar changes to native alignment have no apparent impact on clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: This study sought to examine if achieved postoperative alignment when compared to the native anatomy would lead to a difference in Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), and whether the achieved alignment could be broadly categorised by an accepted alignment strategy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data on patients undergoing single primary or bilateral simultaneous total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was carried out. CT scans were used to determine the mean change ("delta values") between the pre and postoperative; hip-knee-ankle angle, lateral distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle and femoral implant rotation. Femoral implant flexion and tibial implant slope were measured postoperatively. The primary outcome was the relationship of the variables to the change in KOOS pain subscale after one year. The secondary outcome was the number of knees which could be categorised postoperatively to an alignment strategy, and the mean PROMs in each cohort. RESULTS: A total of 296 knees in 261 patients were available for analysis. With regards to the primary outcome, the delta values for each variable did not demonstrate any association with the change in knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) pain score. Approximately 46% of knees could not be categorised to an alignment strategy based on postoperatively measured alignment, with no significant difference between each cohort with regards to the change in KOOS Pain score. CONCLUSION: Achieved alignment does not consistently match accepted alignment strategies, and appears to confer no benefit to clinical outcomes when the native anatomy is most closely approximated, nor results in poorer outcomes in outliers. This study highlights the importance of routine three dimensional pre and postoperative imaging in clinical practice and for the valid analysis of outcomes in studies on alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Are patient-reported outcomes the same following second-side surgery in primary hip and knee arthroplasty?

AIMS: Up to one in five patients undergoing primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA) require contralateral surgery. This is frequently performed as a staged procedure. This study aimed to determine if outcomes, as determined by the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Knee Score (OKS) differed following second-side surgery. METHODS: Over a five-year period all patients who underwent staged bilateral primary THA or TKA utilizing the same type of implants were studied. Eligible patients had both preoperative and one year Oxford scores and had their second procedure completed within a mean (2 SDs) of the primary surgery. Patient demographics, radiographs, and OHS and OKS were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 236 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 122 were THAs and 114 TKAs. The mean age was 66.5 years (SD 9.4), with a 2:1 female:male ratio. THAs showed similar significant improvements in outcomes following first- and second-side surgery, regardless of sex. In contrast for TKAs, although male patients demonstrated the same pattern as the THAs, female TKAs displayed significantly less improvement in both OKS and its pain component following second-side surgery. CONCLUSION: Female patients undergoing second-side TKA showed less improvement in Oxford and pain scores compared to the first-side. This difference in outcome following second-side surgery did not apply to male patients undergoing TKA, or to either sex undergoing THA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(4):243-254.

Are There Gender-Specific Errors in Restoration of Hip Biomechanics That Affect Outcome Following Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: There are morphologic differences between males and females, which are currently underappreciated during total hip arthroplasty. We sought to assess whether these differences affected surgical process and subsequent outcome. METHODS: A total of 123 patients (75 females, 48 males) had preoperative and 1-year Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and pain scores recorded. Acetabular height and offset, femoral height and offset, and acetabular floor depth were measured on preoperative and postoperative X-rays and then compared to their normal opposite hip. Discrepancies between the replaced and normal hip X-ray measurements were then correlated with changes (the delta gain) in preoperative and 1-year postoperative OHS and pain scores. RESULTS: Postoperatively, females had significantly greater femoral height discrepancy (P = .023) which meant they were lengthened. This led to a reduced delta gain in OHS and pain score at 1 year. Males lost more acetabular offset than females (P = .002), leading to a medialized acetabular center and subsequently reduced delta gain in pain score at 1 year (P = .017). CONCLUSION: Females have a smaller femur leading to a bias toward a conservative (higher) neck cut compared with males and potential for femoral lengthening. Males have a greater acetabular floor depth compared with females and thus reaming to the true floor results in greater loss of acetabular offset. In this series, both scenarios led to reduced improvement in OHS and/or pain scores at 1 year.

Improving efficiency of a regional stand alone bone bank.

The introduction of a stand-alone Bone Bank in our Regional Orthopaedic Hospital has improved the availability of femoral head allograft. Benninger et al. (Bone Joint J 96-B:1307-1311, 2014), demonstrated their institutions bank to be cost effective despite a 30 % discard rate for harvested allograft. We sought to audit our own discard rates and subsequent cost-effectiveness of our bone bank. Donor recruitment. Before approaching a potential donor, our establishment's nurse specialists review their clinical notes and biochemical laboratory results, available on a regional Electronic Care Records. They view femoral head architecture on radiographs against set criteria, Patient Archive and Communication system (SECTRA, Sweden). In total 1383 femoral heads were harvested, 247 were discarded giving an overall rate of 17.9 %. The most common reasons for discard of harvested graft was a positive microbiology/bacteriology result, n = 96 (38.9 %). After a rise in discard rates in 2007, we have steadily reduced our discard rates since 2006/2007 (28.2 %), 2008/2009 (17 %), 2010/2011 (14.8 %), and finally to 10.3 % in 2012/2013. In the current financial year, our cost to harvest, test, store and release a femoral head is £ 610. With a structured donor recruitment process and unique pre-operative radiographic analysis we have successfully reduced our discard rates bi-annually making our bone bank increasingly cost-effective.