Reduction in Offset Is Associated With Worse Functional Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting reports exist about the effect of offset variation on functional outcomes following total hip arthroplasty. Reproducing native hip offset is thought to optimize function by restoring biomechanics and appropriately tensioning the hip abductor muscles. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of failing to restore global hip offset in comparison to the native contralateral hip. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospective patient cohort was performed on patients undergoing an elective primary total hip arthroplasty. A total of 414 patients who had a minimum of 12 months of follow-up were included. Postoperative plain radiographs were analyzed for offset and compared to the contralateral native hip. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Veterans RAND 12 (VR-12) scores were assessed preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Regression analyses indicated that a reduction in offset of >20 mm resulted in worse WOMAC pain (P = .005) and motion (P = .015) scores compared to those with maintained offset. WOMAC function (P = .063), global (P = .025), and VR-12 scores were not affected (physical P = .656; mental P = .815). Reduction in offset up to 20 mm and increased offset were not significantly associated with patient-reported outcome measures (P-values ranged from .102 to .995). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated an association between reduction in offset by >20 mm and worse WOMAC pain and motion scores following total hip arthroplasty. Surgeons should avoid decreases in offset >20 mm in order to optimize functional outcomes.

Cemented Polished Tapered Stems Have Lower Revision Rates Than Commonly Used Cementless Implant up to 17 Years of Follow-Up: An Analysis of 201,889 Total Hip Replacements From the Australian Orthopedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: Data assessing femoral stems may be influenced by grouping together matt and polished stems, despite their differing reported survivorship. The aim of this study is to assess the difference in revision rates between commonly used cemented and cementless stems when polished tapered stems are assessed independently of matt stems. METHODS: Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry data from 1999 to 2019 were used to assess difference in revision rates between the 5 most commonly implanted femoral cemented and cementless stems for osteoarthritis. Cemented matt femoral stems, stems using line-to-line cementing techniques and procedures using non-cross-linked polyethylene, large head (>32 mm) metal-on-metal bearing surfaces or exchangeable necks were excluded. Cumulative percent revision was used to help compare survivorship between stems. RESULTS: There were 201,889 total hip replacements meeting the inclusion criteria, of which 50.0% were cemented and 50.0% cementless. Cemented stems had a lower rate of revision at all time points compared to cementless stems. This was most significant during the first 2 weeks (hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.40-0.58, P < .001) compared to 2 weeks postoperatively and onwards (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.90, P < .001). A subanalysis of head size, bearing type, and surgeon volume further supported the use of a cemented stem. CONCLUSION: Commonly used cemented polished tapered stems have a lower revision rate when compared to commonly used cementless prostheses, and are recommended in all age groups for both low-volume and high-volume surgeons especially when head size 32 mm or smaller is used.

Stainless Steel Femoral Heads Reduce Rate of Revision When Compared to Ion-Implanted Chromium-Cobalt Heads With a Single Cemented Femoral Design: An Analysis of 40,468 Total Hip Replacements From the Australian Orthopedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: In order to reduce the incidence of total hip joint replacement revision for wear, multiple advanced materials and alloys targeting hip replacement tribology have been introduced. Ion implantation of chromium-cobalt heads is thought to reduce wear due to increased surface hardness and lower friction. These advances in technology result in additional manufacturing costs. However, it is unclear whether these attributes result in a decreased rate of revision for wear and when used with modern highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE). The aim of this study is to compare the survivorship of stainless steel and ion-implanted chromium-cobalt femoral heads in order to determine whether ion implantation has a lower risk of revision. METHODS: Data from the Australian Orthopedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry included all stainless steel and low-friction ion-treated (LFIT) femoral heads used in conjunction with a primary Exeter/Trident hip replacement combination and XLPE liners performed for osteoarthritis. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship were used to describe the time to first revision. Hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox proportional hazard models, with adjustment for age and gender, were used to compare revision rates between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were 40,468 total hip replacements that met the inclusion criteria. Stainless steel heads had a lower revision rate compared to LFIT chromium-cobalt heads (HR 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.00, P = .048). The difference in the rate of revision was even greater when 32-mm heads were used (HR 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.89, P = .002). There was no difference in revision for loosening between head alloys or when stratified by age. CONCLUSION: Given the increased costs associated with LFIT implants and the lower rate of revision for stainless steel heads, we recommend the use of a stainless steel heads when using an Exeter/Trident hybrid hip with an XLPE liner.

The Outcome of Cemented Acetabular Components in Total Hip Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis Defines a Proficiency Threshold: Results of 22,956 Cases From the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: The declining popularity of cemented acetabular components is incongruous, given the published results of prostheses implanted using contemporary techniques. The outcome of arthroplasty has previously been demonstrated to correlate with surgeon experience and volume of practice. We aim to explore if surgeon volume alters outcomes of cemented acetabular components based on survivorship data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR). METHODS: An observational study was undertaken using a cohort of 22,956 patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis in the period 2003-2016 in whom cemented acetabular components were implanted. The cohort was stratified by age (greater than or less than 65 years) and annualized surgical volume of ≤10, >10-≤25, and >25 cases. RESULTS: Stratified by age and volume, there was a protective benefit against revision conveyed at volume thresholds of 10 cases per annum and 25 cases per annum for patients ≥65 years of age and <65 years of age, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cemented total hip arthroplasty has excellent survivorship out to 15 years based on AOANJRR data. This survivorship is further improved if surgeons perform a higher volume of cases, with >25 cases conferring the greatest benefit. The AOANJRR data set is used to define best practice; surgeons who choose to utilize cemented acetabular fixation should be encouraged to perform this technique in adequate volumes to minimize revision risk and ensure the preservation of this important surgical skill set.

Polished Cemented Femoral Stems Have a Lower Rate of Revision Than Matt Finished Cemented Stems in Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 96,315 Cemented Femoral Stems.

BACKGROUND: Matt and polished femoral stems have been historically grouped together in registry assessment of the outcome of cemented femoral stems in total hip arthroplasty. This is despite differences in the mode of fixation and biomechanics of loading. The aims of this study are to compare the survivorship of polished tapered stems with matt finished cemented stems. METHODS: Data on primary total hip arthroplasty undertaken for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis from September 1999 to December 2014 were included from a National Joint Registry. Revision rates of the 2 different types of femoral components were compared. RESULTS: There were 96,315 cemented femoral stems included, of which 82,972 were polished tapered and 13,343 matt finish. The cumulative percent revision at 14 years of polished stems was 3.6% (3.0-4.2) compared to 4.9% (4.1-5.7) for matt finish stems. Polished tapered stems had a significantly lower revision rate of femoral revision (hazard ratio 0.56, P < .001). This difference is evident in patients aged <75, and becomes apparent in the mid-term and continues to increase with time. Aseptic loosening accounts for 75% of revisions of matt finish stems compared to 20% for polished tapered stems. CONCLUSION: Although both polished and matt finish stems have excellent early to mid-term results, the long-term survivorship of polished stems is significantly better, with aseptic loosening becoming an issue with matt finish stems. In the future reports of cement fixation for femoral stems may benefit from separate analysis of polished and matt finish.

Is a patient self-recorded 6 minute walk test equivalent to a formally recorded 6 minute walk test.

BACKGROUND: Functional tests such as the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) are used in many areas of medicine to monitor disease progression and outcomes of treatment. They are particularly helpful in Orthopaedic surgery as the outcomes have been shown to be responsive to recovery over time. The 6MWT is typically performed in a controlled supervised environment which may limit its widespread use (Terwee et al., Rheumatology (Oxford), 2006, 45, 890-902). The primary aim is to investigate if a patient measured 6MWT is comparable to a 6MWT performed under formal testing conditions (Täger et al., Int. J. Cardiol. 2014, 176, 94-98). METHODS: A total of 55 patients undergoing elective primary hip or knee replacement were instructed to use a smart watch to record a 6MWT in their home community environment (C-6MWT). These measurements were compared to a formally tested 6MWT (F-6MWT) at 2 separate time periods-6 and 12 weeks post-surgery. RESULTS: At 6 weeks post operation the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient between a formally tested and a patient self-administered 6MWT was 0.928 (95% CI 0.832-0.970) and at 12 weeks it was 0.831 (0594-0.935). CONCLUSION: A patient recorded 6 minute walk test shows high agreement with a formally recorded one under research conditions. This makes this test a suitable way to monitor rehabilitation progression and research outcomes at multiple time periods and in remote situations.

Arithmetic hip knee angle measurement on long leg radiograph versus computed tomography-inter-observer and intra-observer reliability.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative alignment is important for knee procedures including total knee arthroplasty (TKA), especially when considering alternative alignments. The arithmetic Hip Knee Angle (aHKA) is a measure of coronal alignment calculated using the medial proximal tibial (MPTA) and lateral distal femoral angles (LDFA). Traditionally, aHKA is measured on long leg radiographs (LLR). This study assesses the reproducibility of aHKA measurement on LLR and robotic-assisted TKA planning CT. METHODS: Sixty-eight TKA patients with pre-operative LLR and planning CTs were included. Three observers measured the LDFA, MPTA and aHKA three times on each modality and intra-observer and inter-observer reliability was calculated. Statistical analysis was undertaken with Pearson's r and the Bland-Altman test. RESULTS: Mean intra-observer coefficient of repeatability (COR) for LLR vs. CT: MPTA 3.50° vs. 1.73°, LDFA 2.93° vs. 2.00° and aHKA 2.88° vs. 2.57° for CT. Inter-observer COR for LLR vs. CT: MPTA 2.74° vs. 1.28°, LDFA 2.31° vs. 1.92°, aHKA 3.56° vs. 2.00°. Mean intra-observer Pearson's r for MPTA was 0.93 for LLR and 0.94 for CT, LDFA 0.90 for LLR and 0.91 for CT and aHKA 0.92 for LLR and 0.94 for CT. Inter-observer Pearson's r for LLR compared to CT: MPTA 0.93 vs. 0.97, LDFA 0.91 vs. 0.90, aHKA 0.91 and 0.95. CONCLUSION: When compared to LLR, CT measurements of MPTA, LDFA and aHKA are more reproducible and have a good correlation with LLR measurement. CT overcomes difficulties with positioning, rotation, habitus and contractures when assessing coronal plane alignment and may obviate the need for LLRs.

Robotic-assisted revision total knee arthroplasty: a novel surgical technique.

BACKGROUND: Revision total knee arthroplasty is a challenging procedure. The robotic-assisted system has been shown to enhance the accuracy of preoperative planning and improve reproducibility in primary arthroplasty surgeries. The aim of this paper was to describe the surgical technique for robotic-assisted revision total knee arthroplasty and the potential benefits of this technique. METHOD: This single-centre retrospective study included a total of 19 patients recruited from April 1, 2021 to April 30, 2022. Inclusion criteria were patients who had Mako™ robotic-assisted revision total knee arthroplasty done within the study period with a more than 6 months follow-up. Statistical analysis was done using Microsoft Excel 16.0. RESULTS: All 19 patients were followed up for 6 to 18 months. All patients in this study had uneventful recoveries without needing any re-revision surgery when reviewed to date. CONCLUSION: With the development of dedicated revision total knee software, robot-assisted revision TKA can be a promising technique that may improve surgical outcomes by increasing the accuracy of implant placement, and soft tissue protection and achieving a better well-balanced knee.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of arthroscopic injection of a bioadhesive hydrogel implant in conjunction with microfracture for the treatment of focal chondral defects of the knee - an Australian perspective.

AIM: JointRep is a bioadhesive hydrogel arthroscopically injected to facilitate cartilage regeneration. The cost-effectiveness of JointRep with microfracture surgery compared to microfracture alone was evaluated from the Australian healthcare system perspective, in patients with symptomatic focal chondral defects (Outerbridge Grade 3 or 4) of the knee who had failed conservative treatment and were indicated for surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A de novo Markov model comprising two health states- 'Alive' and 'Dead' was developed. Model transition probability was based on the general population mortality rates. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, a validated patient-reported tool measuring pain, stiffness, and physical function. The utility was derived by mapping WOMAC scores to EQ-5D scores using a published algorithm. Cost inputs were based on published Australian costs from AR-DRGs, Medicare Benefits Schedule, and Prostheses List. Model outcomes included costs, Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Base-case analysis was conducted for a time horizon of 3 years and a cycle length of 1 year. Cost and health outcomes were discounted at 5% per annum. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Total QALYs were estimated to be higher for JointRep with microfracture surgery (2.61) compared to microfracture surgery alone (1.66), an incremental gain of 0.95 QALY. JointRep with microfracture surgery was associated with an incremental cost of $6,022 compared to microfracture surgery alone, thus leading to an ICER of $6,328. Results were substantially robust to varying parameters in the sensitivity analyses conducted, alternative model settings and assumptions in scenario analyses. LIMITATIONS: The clinical inputs used in the model were based on data from short duration, non-randomized, post-market clinical trial. CONCLUSIONS: JointRep with microfracture surgery is a cost-effective treatment option compared to microfracture alone from the Australian health care system perspective.

Prevalence of non-union and delayed union in proximal humeral fractures.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the prevalence of proximal humeral non-union. There is disagreement on what constitutes union, delayed union and non-union. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of these complications in proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) admitted to trauma hospitals. METHODS: The Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry identified 419 cases of PHFs, of which 306 were analysed. Three upper limb orthopaedic surgeons used X-rays to classify fractures according to the Neer classification and determine union. Twelve-item Short Form Health Survey scores were used to assess patient health and wellbeing. RESULTS: Of 306 cases, 49.4% reached union. Median time to union was 100 days (confidence interval 90-121). Of these, 17.0% united by 60 days, 8.5% united by 89 days and 23.9% united after 90 days, demonstrating 'prolonged delayed union'. There were 25 non-unions with a prevalence of 8.2%, most occurring in two-part surgical neck fractures. CONCLUSION: Our cohort of largely displaced PHFs admitted to trauma hospitals had a non-union prevalence of 8.2% and an overall delayed union prevalence of 32.4%. Consensus is required on definitions of non-union and delayed union timeframes.

Interobserver agreement of Neer and AO classifications for proximal humeral fractures.

BACKGROUND: The classification of proximal humeral fractures remains challenging. The two main classification systems used, the Neer and the AO classification, have both been shown to have less than ideal interobserver agreement. Agreement in classification is required, however, to guide fracture management. METHOD: Data from the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry were collected and the X-rays of 104 proximal humeral fractures were reviewed by three orthopaedic consultants. They classified the fractures according to the Neer and AO classifications, as well as their simplified versions. Interobserver agreement was then assessed using kappa statistics. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement was better overall in the Neer classification, which was moderate (kappa = 0.40-0.58), than the AO classification, which was fair to moderate (kappa = 0.31-0.54). When simplified, the Neer and AO classification interobserver agreement remained similar. CONCLUSION: The classification of proximal humeral fractures with both the Neer and the AO systems remains difficult with minimal improvements seen when reducing the number of categories in each classification system. From these results, the Neer classification system would appear slightly more useful in clinical practice to guide treatment.

Sterile stockinette in orthopaedic surgery: a possible pathway for infection.

BACKGROUND: The prevention of infection in joint replacement surgery is important. Preparing and draping the patient is fundamental to maintaining sterility of the operative field. One method of draping for total knee replacement (TKR) surgery involves cleaning the operative leg with antiseptic wash then covering the un-prepped foot with a sterile stockinette to sequester the foot from the sterile field. There are two main methods for applying this stockinette. This randomized, blinded control trial simulates stockinette application to assess if it prevents proximal microbial migration into the sterile field. METHOD: To simulate microbial presence, ultraviolet fluorescent powder Glitterbug Powder™ (Arrow Scientific Pty Ltd, Lane Cove, NSW, Australia) was applied to volunteers' feet to the level where antiseptic wash would routinely stop during preparation. The stockinette was applied. Two methods of application (above and below knee) and two surgeons were used. These were randomized for each application. The drapes were removed and a blinded assistant measured the distance of proximal spread of Glitterbug Powder™. RESULTS: Both methods of application were associated with considerable proximal spread of Glitterbug Powder™. For the below knee method, mean proximal spread distance of 49.19%; for the above knee, mean of 71.8% proximal spread (P = 0.038). Multivariate linear regression analysis demonstrated that method and location of the contamination were predictive of the area of contamination and the percentage of the leg contaminated. No other factors (surgeon, gender, hirsute score) were predictive of either area or percentage contamination. CONCLUSION: The surgical field for TKRs may be contaminated by significant proximal microbial spread from the unprepared foot with the use of a sterile stockinette drape.