Wearable sensor-based measures of step-up transfers are supplementary to patient-reported outcome measures following total joint arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the longitudinal assessment of step-up performance in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and correlation with subjective patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: In this sub-analysis of the ADAPT study, PROMs were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Block step-up (BS) transfers were assessed by wearable-derived measures of time. 76 patients undergoing TJA were included. Subgroups were formed isolating the worst performing quartile (low functioning (LF)) from the high functioning (HF), and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: One-year post-surgery, WOMAC function demonstrated strong correlations to WOMAC pain (Pearson's r = 0.67-0.84) and moderate correlations to BS performance (Pearson's r = 0.31-0.54). Both WOMAC and BS significantly improved with a larger effect size for the HF subgroup (0.62 vs. 0.43; p < 0.05). Patients designated to the LF subgroup at 3 months had increased odds of representing the LF subgroup at 12 months (WOMAC = 19; BS = 4). WOMAC defined 18 LF patients at 12 months follow-up. BS performance identified 9 additional LF patients. CONCLUSIONS: WOMAC function scores seem pain dominated. Measures of BS performance allow assessment of otherwise hidden residual functional impairment. Lower functioning 3 months post-surgery is predictive of longer-term impairment.

Severe hip or knee osteoarthritis is a disabling condition which not only impacts patients' mobility but restricts quality of life due to constant pain and consequential lifestyle changes.Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has developed into a successful intervention for patients with advanced hip or knee osteoarthritis.Some patients are dissatisfied after TJA due to residual functional impairment and the inclusion of performance-based tests in the post-operative evaluation and rehabilitation allows for the assessment of otherwise hidden residual impairment.Early detection of functional impairment using the repeated block step-up (BS) transfers allows to facilitate more targeted rehabilitation for better functional outcomes.

Effects of recurrent intra-articular corticosteroid injections for osteoarthritis at 3 months and beyond: a systematic review and meta-analysis in comparison to other injectables.

OBJECTIVE: Intra-articular corticosteroid injections (IACIs) provide temporary symptom relief in osteoarthritis (OA). This meta-analysis investigated the effects of recurrent IACIs at 3 months and beyond. DESIGN: We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane from inception to January 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with OA who received recurrent IACIs compared with other injectables, placebo or no treatment (primary outcomes: pain, function). Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals were reported. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were included (eight knee OA (n = 763), two trapeziometacarpal OA (n = 121)). Patients received between 2 and 8 injections, varying by trial. Trials compared recurrent IACIs with hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), saline or orgotein (follow-up 3-24 months). Greater improvements in pain, function and QoL at 3-24 months were noted for the comparators than with IACIs, with comparators demonstrating an equal or superior effect, or the intervention effect attenuated during follow-up. Recurrent IACIs demonstrated no benefits in pain or function over placebo at 12-24 months. No serious adverse events were recorded. No studies reported on time-to-future interventions, risk of future prosthetic joint infection or other adverse events associated with subsequent joint replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent IACIs often provide inferior (or non-superior) symptom relief compared with other injectables (including placebo) at 3 months and beyond. Other injectables (HA, PRP) often yielded greater improvements in pain and function up to 24 months post-injection. Existing RCTs on recurrent IACIs lack sufficient follow-up data to assess disease progression and time-to-future interventions.

Does the publication of NICE guidelines for venous thromboembolism chemical prophylaxis influence the prescribing patterns of UK hip and knee surgeons?

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the practice of surgeons regarding venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemical prophylaxis for total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR), before and after issuing of updated National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance in 2018. METHODS: A survey, circulated through the British Hip Society and regional trainee networks/collaboratives, was completed by 306 UK surgeons at 187 units. VTE chemical prophylaxis prescribing patterns for surgeons carrying out primary THR (n=258) and TKR (n=253) in low-risk patients was assessed after publication of 2018 NICE recommendations. Prescribing patterns before and after the NICE publication were subsequently explored. RESULTS: Following the new guidance, 34% (n=87) used low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) alone, 33% (n=85) aspirin (commonly preceded by LMWH) and 31% (n=81) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs: with/without preceding LMWH) for THR. For TKR, 42% (n=105) used aspirin (usually monotherapy), 31% (n=78) LMWH alone and 27% (n=68) DOAC (with/without preceding LMWH). NICE guidance changed the practice of 34% of hip surgeons and 41% of knee surgeons, with significantly increased use of aspirin preceded by LMWH for THR (before=25% vs after=73%; p<0.001), and aspirin for TKR (before=18% vs after=84%; p<0.001). Significantly more regimens were NICE guidance compliant after the 2018 update for THR (before=85.7% vs after=92.6%; p=0.011) and TKR (before=87.0% vs after=98.8%; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Over one-third of surveyed surgeons changed their VTE chemical prophylaxis in response to 2018 NICE recommendations, with more THR and TKR surgeons now compliant with latest NICE guidance. The major change in practice was an increased use of aspirin for VTE chemical prophylaxis.

Projections for primary hip and knee replacement surgery up to the year 2060: an analysis based on data from The National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.

INTRODUCTION: We estimated the number of primary total hip and knee replacements (THR and TKR) that will need to be performed up to the year 2060. METHODS: We used data from The National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man on the volume of primary THRs (n=94,936) and TKRs (n=100,547) performed in 2018. We projected future numbers of THR and TKR using a static estimated rate from 2018 applied to population growth forecast data from the UK Office for National Statistics up to 2060. RESULTS: By 2060, THR and TKR volume would increase from 2018 levels by an estimated 37.7% (n=130,766) and 36.6% (n=137,341), respectively. For both males and females demand for surgery was also higher for patients aged 70 and over, with older patients having the biggest relative increase in volume over time: 70-79 years (44.6% males, 41.2% females); 80-89 years (112.4% males, 85.6% females); 90 years and older (348.0% males, 198.2% females). CONCLUSION: By 2060 demand for hip and knee joint replacement is estimated to increase by almost 40%. Demand will be greatest in older patients (70+ years), which will have significant implications for the health service requiring forward planning given that morbidity and resource use is higher in this population. These issues, coupled with two waves of COVID-19, will impact the ability of health services to deliver timely joint replacement to many patients for a number of years, requiring urgent planning.

Effects of presurgical interventions on chronic pain after total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Nearly 100 000 primary total knee replacements (TKR) are performed in the UK annually. The primary aim of TKR is pain relief, but 10%-34% of patients report chronic pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of presurgical interventions in preventing chronic pain after TKR. DESIGN: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and PsycINFO were searched from inception to December 2018. Screening and data extraction were performed by two authors. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool and quality of evidence was assessed by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Pain at 6 months or longer; adverse events. INTERVENTIONS: Presurgical interventions aimed at improving TKR outcomes. RESULTS: Eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with data from 960 participants were included. The studies involved nine eligible comparisons. We found moderate-quality evidence of no effect of exercise programmes on chronic pain after TKR, based on a meta-analysis of 6 interventions with 229 participants (standardised mean difference 0.20, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.47, I2=0%). Sensitivity analysis restricted to studies at overall low risk of bias confirmed findings. Another RCT of exercise with no data available for meta-analysis showed no benefit. Studies evaluating combined exercise and education intervention (n=1) and education alone (n=1) suggested similar findings. Adverse event data were reported by most studies, but events were too few to draw conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: We found low to moderate-quality evidence to suggest that neither preoperative exercise, education nor a combination of both is effective in preventing chronic pain after TKR. This review also identified a lack of evaluations of other preoperative interventions, such as multimodal pain management, which may improve long-term pain outcomes after TKR. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017041382.

Is social support associated with patient-reported outcomes after joint replacement? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Identifying prognostic factors for outcomes after joint replacement could improve the provision of stratified care. This systematic review evaluated whether social support is a prognostic factor for better patient-reported outcomes after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR). METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO were searched from inception to April 2019. Cohort studies evaluating the association between social support and patient-reported outcomes at three months or longer after THR or TKR were included. Data were extracted from study reports. Study quality was assessed using the QUIPS tool. Data were synthesized using meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016041485). FINDINGS: Searches identified 5,810 articles and 56 studies with data from 119,165 patients were included. In meta-analysis, the presence of social support had a beneficial effect on long-term post-operative WOMAC (mean difference 2.88; 95% CIs 1.30; 4.46) and Oxford Knee Score (0.29; 0.12, 0.45). Social support measured using a validated questionnaire was found to be associated with WOMAC pain (0.04; 0.00, 0.08) but not WOMAC function (-0.01; -0.12, 0.11). The presence of social support had a positive association with some SF-36 subscales but not others. For all outcomes, results of narrative synthesis were inconsistent. INTERPRETATION: There is evidence that social support is a prognostic factor for some outcomes after joint replacement. Development and evaluation of complex interventions to improve social support and social integration is warranted. FUNDING: This study was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol.

Systematic review of the safety and efficacy of osseointegration prosthesis after limb amputation.

BACKGROUND: Osseointegration, an approach for direct skeletal attachment of a prosthesis to an amputated limb, may address many of the problems associated with socket prostheses. The safety of osseointegration remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to summarize evidence on functional and clinical outcomes, as well as adverse effects of osseointegration for patients with a limb amputation. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched to April 2018. Eligible studies were observational, case and qualitative studies, and RCTs conducted in patients with a limb amputation, who were managed with osseointegrated prostheses and had follow-up data. RESULTS: Twenty-two eligible articles comprising 13 unique studies were included. No RCT was identified. Apart from three case reports that comprised one to five patients, the sample size of studies ranged from 11 to 100 participants. All relevant studies reported improvement in functional outcomes (walking ability, prosthetic use and mobility), satisfaction and quality of life following osseointegration, compared with their preoperative status or when using a conventional socket prosthesis. Infection rates ranged from 1 (95 per cent c.i. 0 to 5) to 77 (59 to 88) per cent. The majority of infections were described as low-grade soft tissue or superficial infections related to the skin-implant interface, and were treated effectively with antibiotics. None of the studies reported additional amputation or death as a result of osseointegration. CONCLUSION: Osseointegration after limb amputation improves prosthetic use, comfort when sitting, walking ability, mobility, gait and quality of life. However, it is associated with an increased risk of soft tissue infection.

Using home sensing technology to assess outcome and recovery after hip and knee replacement in the UK: the HEmiSPHERE study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Over 160 000 people with severe hip or knee pain caused by osteoarthritis undergo total hip (THR) or knee replacement (TKR) surgery each year in the UK within the National Health Service (NHS), and this number is expected to increase. Innovative approaches to evaluating surgical outcomes will be needed to respond to the increasing burden of joint replacement surgery. The Sensor Platform for Healthcare in a Residential Environment, Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration (SPHERE-IRC) have developed a system of sensors that can monitor the health-related behaviours of people living at home. The system includes sensors for the home environment (measuring temperature, humidity, room occupancy, water and electricity usage), a wristband body-worn activity monitor and silhouette (body outline) sensors. The aim of HEmiSPHERE (Hip and knEe study of a Sensor Platform of HEalthcare in a Residential Environment) is to (1) determine the accuracy and feasibility of the sensory data as it compares with conventional assessment of health outcomes after surgery using patient self-reported questionnaires, and (2) to explore how the SPHERE system is useful for everyday clinical decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A feasibility study recruiting and installing the SPHERE system in the homes of up to 30 NHS adult patients as they undergo a THR or TKR. Through a mixed-methods design, the SPHERE system will monitor and record continuous measurements of daily behaviour. Main outcomes will assess the relationships between environmental, behavioural and movement data and the parameters of interest from the standard clinical assessments measuring patient outcomes over time. Patient interviews and focus groups with consultant orthopaedic surgeons will provide in-depth understanding of the acceptability, feasibility and accuracy of the data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We aim to disseminate the findings through regional talks and seminars, international conferences and peer-reviewed journals and social media.

Is the rate of revision of 36 mm metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasties with Pinnacle acetabular components related to the year of the initial operation? an interrupted time-series analysis using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine whether the rates of revision for metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasties (THAs) with Pinnacle components varied according to the year of the initial operation, and compare these with the rates of revision for other designs of MoM THA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales included 36 mm MoM THAs with Pinnacle acetabular components which were undertaken between 2003 and 2012 with follow-up for at least five years (n = 10 776) and a control group of other MoM THAs (n = 13 817). The effect of the year of the primary operation on all-cause rates of revision was assessed using Cox regression and interrupted time-series analysis. RESULTS: For MoM THAs involving Pinnacle components, those undertaken between 2007 and 2012 had higher rates of revision compared with those undertaken between 2004 and 2006 (hazard ratio (HR) 2.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 2.57; p < 0.001). For THAs undertaken during and after 2007, the number of revisions per 1000 implant-years at risk significantly increased by 5.20 (95% CI 0.52 to 9.89; p = 0.033) compared with those undertaken before this time. In the control group, THAs undertaken between 2007 and 2012 also had higher rates of revision (HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.49 to 2.10; p < 0.001), with revisions per 1000 implant-years for those undertaken during and after 2007 significantly increasing by 6.13 (95% CI 1.42 to 10.83; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: The five-year revision rates were significantly increased for all primary MoM THAs undertaken from 2007 onwards. Contrary to recent reports, this finding was not specific to those involving Pinnacle acetabular components and may be explained by increased surveillance and recent lowering of the threshold for revision. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:33-41.

Revision for prosthetic joint infection following hip arthroplasty: Evidence from the National Joint Registry.

OBJECTIVES: We used the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man (NJR) to investigate the risk of revision due to prosthetic joint infection (PJI) for patients undergoing primary and revision hip arthroplasty, the changes in risk over time, and the overall burden created by PJI. METHODS: We analysed revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed due to a diagnosis of PJI and the linked index procedures recorded in the NJR between 2003 and 2014. The cohort analysed consisted of 623 253 index primary hip arthroplasties, 63 222 index revision hip arthroplasties and 7585 revision THAs performed due to a diagnosis of PJI. The prevalence, cumulative incidence functions and the burden of PJI (total procedures) were calculated. Overall linear trends were investigated with log-linear regression. RESULTS: We demonstrated a prevalence of revision THA due to prosthetic joint infection of 0.4/100 procedures following primary and 1.6/100 procedures following revision hip arthroplasty. The prevalence of revision due to PJI in the three months following primary hip arthroplasty has risen 2.3-fold (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 4.1) between 2005 and 2013, and 3.0-fold (95% CI 1.1 to 8.5) following revision hip arthroplasty. Over 1000 procedures are performed annually as a consequence of hip PJI, an increase of 2.6-fold between 2005 and 2013. CONCLUSIONS: Although the risk of revision due to PJI following hip arthroplasty is low, it is rising and, coupled with the established and further predicted increased incidence of both primary and revision hip arthroplasty, this represents a growing and substantial treatment burden.Cite this article: E. Lenguerrand, M. R. Whitehouse, A. D. Beswick, S. A. Jones, M. L. Porter, A. W. Blom. Revision for prosthetic joint infection following hip arthroplasty: Evidence from the National Joint Registry. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:391-398. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.66.BJR-2017-0003.R1.

The effect of numbness on outcome from total knee replacement.

INTRODUCTION Some patients report continuing pain and functional limitations after total knee replacement (TKR). While numbness around the TKR scar is common, the impact of numbness is less clear. One particular activity that could be influenced by numbness is kneeling. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of numbness around TKR scars on health related quality of life and kneeling ability. METHODS Fifty-six patients were recruited one year after primary TKR. Sensation around the knee was assessed through patient self-reporting, monofilament testing and vibration, and patients' distress was measured on a visual analogue scale. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC®) index, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the painDETECT® (Pfizer, Berlin, Germany) questionnaire and the EQ-5D™ (EuroQol, Rotterdam, Netherlands) questionnaire were used. Participants were also asked about kneeling ability. RESULTS While 68% of patients reported numbness around their TKR scar, there was no statistically significant correlation between numbness and distress at numbness (self-report: 0.23, p=0.08; monofilament: 0.15, p=0.27). Furthermore, numbness did not correlate significantly with joint specific PROMs (WOMAC®: 0.21, p=0.13; KOOS: 0.18, p=0.19). However, difficulty with kneeling did correlate with both self-reported numbness (0.36, p=0.020) and worse PROM scores (WOMAC® pain subscale: 0.62, p<0.001; KOOS: 0.64, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Numbness after knee replacement is common but is not associated with worse patient reported outcomes.

Systematic review of risk prediction scores for surgical site infection or periprosthetic joint infection following joint arthroplasty.

Accurate identification of individuals at high risk of surgical site infections (SSIs) or periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) influences clinical decisions and development of preventive strategies. We aimed to determine progress in the development and validation of risk prediction models for SSI or PJI using a systematic review. We searched for studies that have developed or validated a risk prediction tool for SSI or PJI following joint replacement in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane databases; trial registers and reference lists of studies up to September 2016. Nine studies describing 16 risk scores for SSI or PJI were identified. The number of component variables in a risk score ranged from 4 to 45. The C-index ranged from 0·56 to 0·74, with only three risk scores reporting a discriminative ability of >0·70. Five risk scores were validated internally. The National Healthcare Safety Network SSIs risk models for hip and knee arthroplasties (HPRO and KPRO) were the only scores to be externally validated. Except for HPRO which shows some promise for use in a clinical setting (based on predictive performance and external validation), none of the identified risk scores can be considered ready for use. Further research is urgently warranted within the field.

Rates of hip and knee joint replacement amongst different ethnic groups in England: an analysis of National Joint Registry data.

OBJECTIVE: Despite a health care system that is free at the point of delivery, ethnic minorities may not always get care equitable to that of White patients in England. We examined whether ethnic differences exist in joint replacement rates and surgical practice in England. DESIGN: 373,613 hip and 428,936 knee National Joint Registry (NJR) primary replacement patients had coded ethnicity in Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). Age and gender adjusted observed/expected ratios of hip and knee replacements amongst ethnic groups were compared using indirect standardisation. Associations between ethnic group and type of procedure were explored and effects of demographic, clinical and hospital-related factors examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Adjusted standardised observed/expected ratios were substantially lower in Blacks and Asians than Whites for hip replacement (Blacks 0.33 [95% CI, 0.31-0.35], Asians 0.20 [CI, 0.19-0.21]) and knee replacement (Blacks 0.64 [CI, 0.61-0.67], Asians 0.86 % [CI, 0.84-0.88]). Blacks were more likely to receive uncemented hip replacements (Blacks 52%, Whites 37%, Asians 44%; P < 0.001). Black men and women aged <70 years were less likely to receive unicondylar or patellofemoral knee replacements than Whites (men 10% vs 15%, P = 0.001; women 6% vs 14%, P < 0.001). After adjustment for demographic, clinical and hospital-related factors, Blacks were more likely to receive uncemented hip replacement (OR 1.43 [CI, 1.11-1.84]). CONCLUSIONS: In England, hip and knee replacement rates and prosthesis type given differ amongst ethnic groups. Whether these reflect differences in clinical need or differential access to treatment requires urgent investigation.

Central sensitization as a determinant of patients' benefit from total hip and knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Discrepancies exist between osteoarthritic joint changes and pain severity before and after total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement. This study investigated whether the interaction between pre-operative widespread hyperalgesia and severity of radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) was associated with pain severity before and after joint replacement. METHODS: Data were analysed from 232 patients receiving THR and 241 receiving TKR. Pain was assessed pre-operatively and at 12 months post-operatively using the WOMAC Pain Scale. Widespread hyperalgesia was assessed through forearm pressure pain thresholds (PPTs). Radiographic OA was evaluated using the Kellgren and Lawrence scheme. Statistical analysis was conducted using multilevel models, and adjusted for confounding variables. RESULTS: Pre-operative: In knee patients, there was weak evidence that the effect of PPTs on pain severity was greater in patients with more severe OA (Grade 3 OA: ß = 0.96 vs. Grade 4: ß = 4.03), indicating that in these patients higher PPTs (less widespread hyperalgesia) was associated with less severe pain. In hip patients, the effect of PPTs on pain did not differ with radiographic OA (Grade 3 OA: ß = 3.95 vs. Grade 4: ß = 3.67). Post-operative: There was weak evidence that knee patients with less severe OA who had greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted less from surgery (Grade 3 OA: ß = 2.28; 95% CI -1.69 to 6.25). Conversely, there was weak evidence that hip patients with more severe OA who had greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted more from surgery (Grade 4 OA: ß = -2.92; 95% CI -6.58 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Widespread sensitization may be a determinant of how much patients benefit from joint replacement, but the effect varies by joint and severity of structural joint changes. SIGNIFICANCE: Pre-operative widespread hyperalgesia and radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) severity may influence how much patients benefit from joint replacement. Patients undergoing knee replacement with less severe OA and greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted less from surgery than patients with less hyperalgesia. Patients undergoing hip replacement with more severe OA and greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted more than patients with less hyperalgesia.

The influence of cemented femoral stem choice on the incidence of revision for periprosthetic fracture after primary total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of national joint registry data.

AIMS: Periprosthetic fracture (PF) after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an uncommon but potentially devastating complication. This study aims to investigate the influence of cemented stem designs on the risk of needing a revision for a PF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed data on 257 202 primary THAs with cemented stems and 390 linked first revisions for PF recorded in the National Joint Registry (NJR) of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to determine if a cemented femoral stem brand was associated with the risk of having revision for a PF after primary THA. All cemented femoral stem brands with more than 10 000 primary operations recorded in the NJR were identified. The four most commonly used cemented femoral stems were the Exeter V40 (n = 146 409), CPT (n = 24 300), C-Stem (n = 15 113) and Charnley (n = 20 182). We compared the revision risk ratios due to PF amongst the stems using a Poisson regression model adjusting for patient factors. Compared with the Exeter V40, the age, gender and ASA grade adjusted revision rate ratio was 3.89 for the cemented CPT stem (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.07 to 4.93), 0.89 for the C-Stem (95% CI 0.57 to 1.41) and 0.41 for the Charnley stem (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The limitations of the study include incomplete data capture, analysis of only PF requiring revision and that observation does not imply causality. Nevertheless, this study demonstrates that the choice of a cemented stem may influence the risk of revision for PF. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1347-54.

The Alpha-Defensin Immunoassay and Leukocyte Esterase Colorimetric Strip Test for the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Synovial biomarkers have recently been adopted as diagnostic tools for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), but their utility is uncertain. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the evidence on the accuracy of the alpha-defensin immunoassay and leukocyte esterase colorimetric strip test for the diagnosis of PJI compared with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society diagnostic criteria. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to identify diagnostic technique studies evaluating the accuracy of alpha-defensin or leukocyte esterase in the diagnosis of PJI. MEDLINE and Embase on Ovid, ACM, ADS, arXiv, CERN DS (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire Document Server), CrossRef DOI (Digital Object Identifier), DBLP (Digital Bibliography & Library Project), Espacenet, Google Scholar, Gutenberg, HighWire, IEEE Xplore (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers digital library), INSPIRE, JSTOR (Journal Storage), OAlster (Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting), Open Content, Pubget, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for appropriate studies indexed from inception until May 30, 2015, along with unpublished or gray literature. The classification of studies and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Data extraction permitted meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with construction of receiver operating characteristic curves for each test. RESULTS: We included 11 eligible studies. The pooled diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of alpha-defensin (6 studies) for PJI were 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.00) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.99), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) for alpha-defensin and PJI was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.00). The pooled diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of leukocyte esterase (5 studies) for PJI were 0.81 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.95) and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.82 to 0.99), respectively. The AUC for leukocyte esterase and PJI was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95 to 0.98). There was substantial heterogeneity among studies for both diagnostic tests. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy for PJI was high for both tests. Given the limited number of studies and the large cost difference between the tests, more independent research on these tests is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Assessment of physical function following total hip arthroplasty: Inertial sensor based gait analysis is supplementary to patient-reported outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Functional outcome assessment after total hip arthroplasty often involves subjective patient-reported outcome measures whereas analysis of gait is more objective. The study's aims were to compare subjective and objective functional outcomes after total hip arthroplasty between patients with low and high self-reported levels of pre-operative physical function. METHODS: Patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (n=36; m/f=18/18; mean age=63.9; SD=9.8 years; BMI=26.3; SD=3.5) were divided into a low and high function subgroup, and prospective measures of WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) function score and gait were compared at baseline and 3 and 12 months post-operatively. FINDINGS: WOMAC function scores significantly improved in both low and high function subgroups at 3 months post-operatively whereas gait parameters only improved in patients with a low pre-operative function. Between 3 and 12 months post-operatively, WOMAC function scores had not significantly further improved whereas several gait parameters significantly improved in the low function group. WOMAC function scores and gait parameters were only moderately correlated (Spearman's r=0.33-0.51). INTERPRETATION: In a cohort of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty, pre-operative differences in mean WOMAC function scores and gait parameters between low and high function subgroups disappeared by 3 months post-operatively. Gait parameters only improved significantly during the first 3 post-operative months in patients with a low pre-operative function, highlighting the importance of investigating relative changes rather than the absolute changes and the need to consider patients with high and low functions separately.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications following the posterior and lateral surgical approaches to total hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Total hip arthroplasty is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures. Despite this, medical evidence to inform the choice of surgical approach is lacking. Currently in the UK, the two most frequently performed approaches to the hip are the posterior and the direct lateral. METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to Cochrane guidelines following an extensive search for prospective controlled trials published in any language before January 2014. Of the 728 records identified from searches, 6 prospective studies (including 3 randomised controlled trials) involving 517 participants provided data towards this review. FINDINGS: Compared with the lateral approach, the posterior approach conferred a significant reduction in the risk of Trendelenburg gait (odds ratio [OR]: 0.31, p=0.0002) and stem malposition (OR: 0.24, p=0.02), and a non-significant reduction in dislocation (OR: 0.37, p=0.16) and heterotopic ossification (OR: 0.41, p=0.13). Neither approach conferred a functional advantage. We draw attention to the paucity of evidence and the need for a further randomised trial.

Mortality after total hip replacement surgery: A systematic review.

Total hip replacement causes a short-term increase in the risk of mortality. It is important to quantify this and to identify modifiable risk factors so that the risk of post-operative mortality can be minimised. We performed a systematic review and critical evaluation of the current literature on the topic. We identified 32 studies published over the last 10 years which provide either 30-day or 90-day mortality data. We estimate the pooled incidence of mortality during the first 30 and 90 days following hip replacement to be 0.30% (95% CI 0.22 to 0.38) and 0.65% (95% CI 0.50 to 0.81), respectively. We found strong evidence of a temporal trend towards reducing mortality rates despite increasingly co-morbid patients. The risk factors for early mortality most commonly identified are increasing age, male gender and co-morbid conditions, particularly cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular complications appear to have overtaken fatal pulmonary emboli as the leading cause of death after hip replacement. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:175-82.

Does measuring the range of motion of the hip and knee add to the assessment of disability in people undergoing joint replacement?

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Range of motion (ROM) is a core component of some commonly used measures of disability, such as the American Knee Society Score and Harris Hip Score. However, the relationship between ROM and function is contested. The aim of this cross-sectional analysis was to investigate the relationship between pre-operative range of motion (ROM) and disability in patients undergoing hip and knee joint replacement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred and forty-nine patients recorded on NHS records as listed for joint replacement completed a range of measures prior to surgery. Pre-operative hip or knee ROM was measured by a trained research nurse using a hand-held goniometer. Joint pain severity was assessed using the WOMAC Pain Scale. Self-report activity limitations and participation restrictions were measured with the WOMAC Function Scale and the Aberdeen Impairment, Activity Limitation and Participation Restriction Measure. Observed activity limitations were assessed through three performance tests: 20-metre timed walk, sit-to-stand-to-sit, and 20-cm step tests. RESULTS: Pre-operative hip and knee ROM correlated weakly with self-report activity limitations (0.11 to 0.43), observed activity limitations (0.09 to 0.39) and self-report participation restrictions (-0.32 to 0.06). In comparison to ROM, correlations between joint pain and self-report activity limitations and participation restrictions were consistently moderate-high (-0.53 to 0.80). However, patients with restricted knee joint flexion (<110°) had significantly worse pain, activity limitations and participation restrictions than patients with non-restricted flexion (≥110°). Patients with restricted hip joint flexion (<95°) had greater activity limitations on some measures than patients with non-restricted flexion (>95°). DISCUSSION: This study suggests that modest restrictions of ROM are of little relevance to functional ability but that a certain amount of flexion is required for adequate function. We recommend that ROM is not the best means of assessing patients' disability prior to surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III - cohort study.