A prospective study on cancer risk after total hip replacements for 41,402 patients linked to the Cancer registry of Norway.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised that implants used in total hip replacements (THR) could lead to increased cancer risk. Several different materials, metals and fixation techniques are used in joint prostheses and different types of articulation can cause an increased invasion of particles or ions into the human body. METHODS: Patients with THR registered in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register during 1987-2009 were linked to the Cancer registry of Norway. Patients with THR due to osteoarthritis, under the age of 75 at time of surgery, were included. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) were applied to compare cancer risk for THR patients to the general population. Types of THR were divided into cemented (both components), uncemented (both components), and hybrid (cemented femoral and uncemented acetabular components). To account for selection mechanisms, time dependent covariates were applied in Cox-regression, adjusting for cancer risk the first 10 years after surgery. The analyses were adjusted for age, gender and if the patient had additional THR-surgery in the same or the opposite hip. The study follows the STROBE guidelines. RESULTS: Comparing patients with THR to the general population in Norway we found no differences in cancer risk. The overall SIR for the THR-patients after 10 years follow-up was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.97-1.07). For cemented THR, the SIR after 10 years follow-up was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.94-1.05), for uncemented, 1.16 (95% CI: 1.02-1.30), and for hybrid 1.12 (95% CI: 0.91-1.33). Adjusted Cox analyses showed that patients with uncemented THRs had an elevated risk for cancer (hazard ratio: HR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05-1.46, p = 0.009) when compared to patients with cemented THRs after 10 years follow-up. Stratified by gender the increased risk was only present for men. The risk for patients with hybrid THRs was not significantly increased (HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.85-1.35, p = 0.55) compared to patients with cemented THRs. CONCLUSIONS: THR patients had no increased risk for cancer compared to the general population. We found, however, that receiving an uncemented THR was associated with a small increased risk for cancer compared to cemented THR in males, but that this may be prone to unmeasured confounding.

Patient and surgical factors affecting procedure duration and revision risk due to deep infection in primary total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess which patient and procedure factors affected both the risk of infection as well as procedure duration. Additionally, to assess if procedure duration affected the revision risk due to deep infection in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients and in a subgroup of low-risk patients. METHODS: 28,262 primary TKA with 311 revisions due to deep infection were included from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) and analysed from primary surgery from 2005 until 31st December 2015 with a 1 and 4 year follow up. The risk of revision due to deep infection was calculated in a multivariable Cox regression model including patient and procedure related risk factors, assessing Hazard Ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed statistically significant associations with revision due to deep infection and increased procedure duration for male patients, ASA3+ (American Society of Anesthesiologists) and perioperative complications. Procedure duration ≥110 min (75 percentile) had a higher risk of deep infection compared to duration <75 min (25 percentile), in the unadjusted analysis (HR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.5, p = 0.001) and in the adjusted analysis (HR = 1.5, 95% CI 1.0-2.1, p = 0.03). For low-risk patients, procedure duration did not increase the risk of infection. CONCLUSION: Male patients, ASA 3+ patients and perioperative complications were risk factors both for longer procedure duration and for deep infection revisions. Patients with a high degree of comorbidity, defined as ASA3+, are at risk of infection with longer procedure durations. The occurrence of perioperative complications potentially leading to a more complex and lengthy procedure was associated with a higher risk of infection. Long procedure duration in itself seems to have minor impact on infection since we found no association in the low-risk patient.

Hospital volume and the risk of revision in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the Nordic countries -an observational study of 14,496 cases.

BACKGROUND: High procedure volume and dedication to unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been suggested to improve revision rates. This study aimed to quantify the annual hospital volume effect on revision risk in Oxfordu nicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the Nordic countries. METHODS: 14,496 cases of cemented medial Oxford III UKA were identified in 126 hospitals in the four countries included in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database from 2000 to 2012. Hospitals were divided by quartiles into 4 annual procedure volume groups (≤11, 12-23, 24-43 and ≥44). The outcome was revision risk after 2 and 10 years calculated using Kaplan Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to assess the Hazard Ratio (HR) of any revision due to specific reasons with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The implant survival was 80% at 10 years in the volume group ≤11 procedures per year compared to 83% in other volume groups. The HR adjusted for age category, sex, year of surgery and nation was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.76-0.99, p = 0.036) for the group 12-23 procedures per year, 0.78 (95% CI: 0.68-0.91, p = 0.002) for the group 24-43 procedures per year and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70-0.94, p = 0.006) for the group ≥44 procedures per year compared to the low volume group. Log-rank test was p = 0.003. The risk of revision for unexplained pain was 40-50% higher in the low compared with other volume groups. CONCLUSION: Low volume hospitals performing ≤11 Oxford III UKAs per year were associated with an increased risk of revision compared to higher volume hospitals, and unexplained pain as revision cause was more common in low volume hospitals.

Improved outcome after hip fracture surgery in Norway.

Background and purpose - The operative treatment of hip fractures in Norway has changed considerably during the last decade. We used data in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register to investigate possible effects of these changes on reoperations and 1-year mortality. Patients and methods - 72,741 femoral neck (FFN) fractures and trochanteric fractures in patients 60 years or older were analyzed. The fractures were divided into 5 time periods (2005-2006, 2007-2008, 2009-2010, 2011-2012, 2013-2014). Cox regression models were used to calculate unadjusted and adjusted (age group, sex, and ASA class) relative risks (RRs) of reoperation and of 1-year mortality in the different time periods. Results - For undisplaced FFNs treatment with hemiarthroplasty increased from 2.1% to 9.7% during the study period. For displaced FFNs treatment with arthroplasty increased from 56% to 93%. The use of intramedullary nails increased from 9.1% to 26% for stable 2-fragment (AO/OTA A1) trochanteric fractures, from 15% to 33% for multifragment (AO/OTA A2) trochanteric fractures, and from 27% to 61% for intertrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA A3)/subtrochanteric fractures. Compared with the first time period the adjusted 1-year RR for reoperation was 0.43 (95% CI: 0.37-0.49) for displaced FFNs in the last time period. The adjusted 1-year mortality in the last time period was lower for all fractures (RR: 0.87 (0.83-0.91)), displaced FFNs (RR: 0.86 (0.80-0.93)), AO/OTA A1 trochanteric fractures (RR: 0.79 (0.71-0.88)), and AO/OTA A2 trochanteric fractures (RR: 0.87 (0.77-0.98)) when compared with the first study period. Interpretation - Hip fracture treatment in Norway has improved: The risk of reoperation and the 1-year mortality after displaced femoral neck fractures have decreased over a 10-year period. National registration is useful to monitor trends in treatment and outcomes after hip fractures.

Implant Survival After Minimally Invasive Anterior or Anterolateral Vs. Conventional Posterior or Direct Lateral Approach: An Analysis of 21,860 Total Hip Arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (2008 to 2013).

BACKGROUND: Since 2008, there has been an increase in the use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) through an anterior or anterolateral approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Norway. We compared the MIS approaches with the conventional posterior and direct lateral approaches in terms of revision rates and risk of revision. METHODS: On the basis of data in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, 21,860 THAs with an uncemented stem, performed between 2008 and 2013, were identified and included in the cohort. Of these THAs, 2,017 were done through an MIS anterior approach; 2,087, through an MIS anterolateral approach; 5,961, through a posterior approach; and 11,795, through a direct lateral approach. Follow-up ended on December 31, 2015. Two and 5-year survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Relative risk (RR) was calculated using Cox regression analysis, with adjustment for age, sex, primary diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, femoral head size, cup fixation, type of articulation, and duration of surgery and using 6 revision end points based on cause: any cause, infection, dislocation, femoral fracture, aseptic loosening, and other/unknown cause. The median duration of follow-up was 4.3 years. RESULTS: There were no significant differences among the surgical approaches with regard to the 2 and 5-year survival rates or RR of revision due to any cause. The RR of revision due to infection was 0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36 to 0.80, p = 0.002) for the MIS anterior and anterolateral approaches and 0.57 (95% CI = 0.40 to 0.80, p = 0.001) for the posterior approach compared with the direct lateral approach. The RR of revision due to dislocation was 2.1 (95% CI = 1.5 to 3.1, p < 0.001) for the posterior approach compared with the direct lateral approach but no significant difference in risk was found when the MIS anterior and anterolateral approaches were compared with the direct lateral approach (RR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.40 to 1.3, p = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: The revision rates and risk of revision associated with the MIS anterior and anterolateral approaches were not increased compared with those of the conventional posterior and direct lateral approaches. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty.

Background and purpose - The use of a cemented cup together with an uncemented stem in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become popular in Norway and Sweden during the last decade. The results of this prosthetic concept, reverse hybrid THA, have been sparsely described. The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) has already published 2 papers describing results of reverse hybrid THAs in different age groups. Based on data collected over 2 additional years, we wanted to perform in depth analyses of not only the reverse hybrid concept but also of the different cup/stem combinations used. Patients and methods - From the NARA, we extracted data on reverse hybrid THAs from January 1, 2000 until December 31, 2013. 38,415 such hips were studied and compared with cemented THAs. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses were used to estimate the prosthesis survival and the relative risk of revision. The main endpoint was revision for any reason. We also performed specific analyses regarding the different reasons for revision and analyses regarding the cup/stem combinations used in more than 500 cases. Results - We found a higher rate of revision for reverse hybrids than for cemented THAs, with an adjusted relative risk of revision (RR) of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5). At 10 years, the survival rate was 94% (CI: 94-95) for cemented THAs and 92% (95% CI: 92-93) for reverse hybrids. The results for the reverse hybrid THAs were inferior to those for cemented THAs in patients aged 55 years or more (RR =1.1, CI: 1.0-1.3; p < 0.05). We found a higher rate of early revision due to periprosthetic femoral fracture for reverse hybrids than for cemented THAs in patients aged 55 years or more (RR =3.1, CI: 2.2-4.5; p < 0.001). Interpretation - Reverse hybrid THAs had a slightly higher rate of revision than cemented THAs in patients aged 55 or more. The difference in survival was mainly caused by a higher incidence of early revision due to periprosthetic femoral fracture in the reversed hybrid THAs.

Posterior approach compared to direct lateral approach resulted in better patient-reported outcome after hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture.

Background and purpose - Hemiarthroplasty (HA) is the most common treatment for displaced femoral neck fractures in many countries. In Norway, there has been a tradition of using the direct lateral surgical approach, but worldwide a posterior approach is more often used. Based on data from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register, we compared the results of HA operated through the posterior and direct lateral approaches regarding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and reoperation rate. Patients and methods - HAs due to femoral neck fracture in patients aged 60 years and older were included from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register (2005-2014). 18,918 procedures were reported with direct lateral approach and 1,990 with posterior approach. PROM data (satisfaction, pain, quality of life (EQ-5D), and walking ability) were reported 4, 12, and 36 months postoperatively. The Cox regression model was used to calculate relative risk (RR) of reoperation. Results - There were statistically significant differences in PROM data with less pain, better satisfaction, and better quality of life after surgery using the posterior approach than using the direct lateral approach. The risk of reoperation was similar between the approaches. Interpretation - Hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture performed through a posterior approach rather than a direct lateral approach results in less pain, with better patient satisfaction and better quality of life. The risk of reoperation was similar with both approaches.

Bone cement product and failure in total knee arthroplasty.

Background and purpose - The bone cement market for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in Norway has been dominated by a few products and distributors. Palacos with gentamicin had a market share exceeding 90% before 2005, but it was then withdrawn from the market and replaced by new slightly altered products. We have compared the survival of TKAs fixated with Palacos with gentamicin with the survival of TKAs fixated with the bone cements that took over the market. Patients and methods - Using data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register for the period 1997-2013, we included 26,147 primary TKAs in the study. The inclusion criteria were TKAs fixated with the 5 most used bone cements and the 5 most common total knee prostheses for that time period. 6-year Kaplan-Meier survival probabilities were established for each cement product. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess the association between bone cement product and revision risk. Separate analyses were performed with revision for any reason and revision due to deep infection within 1 year postoperatively as endpoints. Adjustments were made for age, sex, diagnosis, and prosthesis brand. Results - Survival was similar for the prostheses in the follow-up period, between the 5 bone cements included: Palacos with gentamicin, Refobacin Palacos R, Refobacin Bone Cement R (Refobacin BCR), Optipac Refobacin Bone Cement R (Optipac Refobacin BCR), and Palacos R + G. Interpretation - According to our findings, the use of the new bone cements led to a survival rate that was as good as with the old bone cement (Palacos with gentamicin).

A cemented cup with acetabular impaction bone grafting is more cost-effective than an uncemented cup in patients under 50 years.

PURPOSE: Acetabular deficiencies in young patients can be restored in several ways during total hip arthroplasty. Currently, cementless cups are most frequently used. Impaction bone grafting of acetabular defects is a more biological approach, but is it cost-effective in young patients on the long term? METHODS: We designed a decision model for a cost-utility analysis of a cemented cup with acetabular impaction bone grafting versus an uncemented cup, in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for the young adult with acetabular bone deficiency, in need for a primary total hip arthroplasty. Outcome probabilities and effectiveness were derived from the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre and the Norwegian Hip Register. Multiple sensitivity analyses were used to assess the contribution of the included variables in the model's outcome. RESULTS: Cemented cups with impaction bone grafting were more cost-effective compared to the uncemented option in terms of costs per QALY. A scenario suggesting equal primary survival rates of both cemented and uncemented cups still showed an effect gain of the cemented cup with impaction bone grafting, but at higher costs. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this model, the first choice of treatment of the acetabular bone deficient osteoarthritic hip in a young patient is reconstruction with impaction bone grafting and a cemented cup.

The risk of revision in total knee arthroplasty is not affected by previous high tibial osteotomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies have found different outcomes after revision of knee arthroplasties performed after high tibial osteotomy (HTO). We evaluated the risk of revision of total knee arthroplasty with or without previous HTO in a large registry material. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 31,077 primary TKAs were compared with 1,399 TKAs after HTO, using Kaplan-Meier 10-year survival percentages and adjusted Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: The adjusted survival analyses showed similar survival in the 2 groups. The Kaplan-Meier 10-year survival was 93.8% in the primary TKA group and 92.6% in the TKA-post-HTO group. Adjusted RR was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.77-1.21; p = 0.8). INTERPRETATION: In this registry-based study, previous high tibial osteotomy did not appear to compromise the results regarding risk of revision after total knee arthroplasty compared to primary knee arthroplasty.

Improved survival for anatomic total shoulder prostheses.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previously, implant survival of total shoulder prostheses was reported to be inferior to that of hemiprostheses. However, the use of total prostheses has increased in Norway due to reported good functional results. On this background, we wanted to study implant survival of 4 major shoulder prosthesis types in Norway between 1994 and 2012. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised 4,173 patients with shoulder replacements reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, including 2,447 hemiprostheses (HPs), 444 anatomic total prostheses (ATPs), 454 resurfacing prostheses (RPs), and 828 reversed total prostheses (RTPs). Three time periods were compared: 1994-1999, 2000-2005, and 2006-2012. Kaplan-Meier failure curves were used to compare implant failure rates for subgroups of patients, and adjusted risks of revision were calculated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: For prostheses inserted from 2006 through 2012, the 5-year survival rates were 95% for HPs (as opposed to 94% in 1994-1999), 95% for ATPs (75% in 1994-1999), 87% for RPs (96% in 1994-1999), and 93% for RTPs (91% in 1994-1999). During the study period, the implant survival improved significantly for ATPs (p < 0.001). A tendency of better results with acute fracture and worse results in sequelae after previous fractures was seen in all time periods. INTERPRETATION: The 5-year implant survival rates were good with all prosthesis types, and markedly improved for anatomic total prostheses in the last 2 study periods. The better functional results with total shoulder prostheses than with hemiprostheses support the trend towards increased use of total shoulder prostheses.

Periprosthetic femoral fracture within two years after total hip replacement: analysis of 437,629 operations in the nordic arthroplasty register association database.

BACKGROUND: We used the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database to evaluate whether age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, fixation, and implant design influence the risk of revision arthroplasty due to periprosthetic fracture within two years from operation of a primary total hip replacement. METHODS: Included in the study were 325,730 cemented femoral stems and 111,899 uncemented femoral stems inserted from 1995 to 2009. Seven frequently used stems (two cemented stems [Exeter and Lubinus SP II] and five uncemented stems [Bi-Metric, Corail, CLS Spotorno, ABG I, and ABG II]) were specifically studied. RESULTS: The incidence of revision at two years was low: 0.47% for uncemented stems and 0.07% for cemented stems. Uncemented stems were much more likely to have this complication (relative risk, 8.72 [95% confidence interval, 7.37 to 10.32]; p < 0.0005). Age had no consistent influence on the risk for revision of cemented stems, but revision in the uncemented group increased with increasing age. A cemented stem was associated with a higher risk in male patients compared with female patients (hazard ratio, 1.95 [95% confidence interval, 1.51 to 2.53]; p < 0.0005), whereas an uncemented stem was associated with a reduced risk in male patients compared with female patients (hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% confidence interval, 0.62 to 0.89]; p = 0.001). The risk for revision due to early periprosthetic fracture increased during the 2003 to 2009 period compared with the 1995 to 2002 period both before and after adjustment for demographic factors and fixation (relative risk, 1.44 [95% confidence interval, 1.18 to 1.69]; p < 0.0005). The hazard ratio for the Exeter stem was about five times higher than that for the Lubinus SP II stem (hazard ratio, 5.03 [95% confidence interval, 3.29 to 7.70]; p < 0.0005). Of the five uncemented stems, the ABG II stem showed an increased hazard ratio of 1.63 (95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 2.28) (p = 0.005), whereas the Corail stem showed a decreased hazard ratio of 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.34 to 0.65) (p < 0.0005) compared with the reference Bi-Metric design. CONCLUSIONS: The shape and surface finish of the femoral stem and its fixation could be related to the increased risk of some prosthetic designs. Even if the incidence of early periprosthetic fracture in general is low and other reasons for revision must be considered, specific attention should be given to the choice of fixation and stem design in risk groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Worse patient-reported outcome after lateral approach than after anterior and posterolateral approach in primary hip arthroplasty. A cross-sectional questionnaire study of 1,476 patients 1-3 years after surgery.

BACKGROUND: The surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often based on surgeon preference and local traditions. The anterior muscle-sparing approach has recently gained popularity in Europe. We tested the hypothesis that patient satisfaction, pain, function, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after THA is not related to the surgical approach. PATIENTS: 1,476 patients identified through the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register were sent questionnaires 1-3 years after undergoing THA in the period from January 2008 to June 2010. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) included the hip disability osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), visual analog scales (VAS) addressing pain and satisfaction, and questions about complications. 1,273 patients completed the questionnaires and were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Adjusted HOOS scores for pain, other symptoms, activities of daily living (ADL), sport/recreation, and quality of life were significantly worse (p < 0.001 to p = 0.03) for the lateral approach than for the anterior approach and the posterolateral approach (mean differences: 3.2-5.0). These results were related to more patient-reported limping with the lateral approach than with the anterior and posterolateral approaches (25% vs. 12% and 13%, respectively; p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Patients operated with the lateral approach reported worse outcomes 1-3 years after THA surgery. Self-reported limping occurred twice as often in patients who underwent THA with a lateral approach than in those who underwent THA with an anterior or posterolateral approach. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes after THA between those who underwent THA with a posterolateral approach and those who underwent THA with an anterior approach.

Higher revision risk for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in low-volume hospitals.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Some studies have found high complication rates and others have found low complication rates after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). We evaluated whether hospital procedure volume influences the risk of revision using data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 5,791 UKAs have been registered in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. We analyzed the 4,460 cemented medial Oxford III implants that were used from 1999 to 2012; this is the most commonly used UKA implant in Norway. Cox regression (adjusted for age, sex, and diagnosis) was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) for revision. 4 different volume groups were compared: 1-10, 11-20, 21-40, and > 40 UKA procedures annually per hospital. We also analyzed the reasons for revision. RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION: We found a lower risk of revision in hospitals performing more than 40 procedures a year than in those with less than 10 UKAs a year, with an unadjusted RR of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.35-0.81) and adjusted RR of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.39-0.90). Low-volume hospitals appeared to have a higher risk of revision due to dislocation, instability, malalignment, and fracture than high-volume hospitals.

Countrywise results of total hip replacement. An analysis of 438,733 hips based on the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: An earlier Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) report on 280,201 total hip replacements (THRs) based on data from 1995-2006, from Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, was published in 2009. The present study assessed THR survival according to country, based on the NARA database with the Finnish data included. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 438,733 THRs performed during the period 1995-2011 in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland were included. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate survival probabilities with 95% confidence interval (CI). Cox multiple regression, with adjustment for age, sex, and diagnosis, was used to analyze implant survival with revision for any reason as endpoint. RESULTS: The 15-year survival, with any revision as an endpoint, for all THRs was 86% (CI: 85.7-86.9) in Denmark, 88% (CI: 87.6-88.3) in Sweden, 87% (CI: 86.4-87.4) in Norway, and 84% (CI: 82.9-84.1) in Finland. Revision risk for all THRs was less in Sweden than in the 3 other countries during the first 5 years. However, revision risk for uncemented THR was less in Denmark than in Sweden during the sixth (HR = 0.53, CI: 0.34-0.82), seventh (HR = 0.60, CI: 0.37-0.97), and ninth (HR = 0.59, CI: 0.36-0.98) year of follow-up. INTERPRETATION: The differences in THR survival rates were considerable, with inferior results in Finland. Brand-level comparison of THRs in Nordic countries will be required.

Increased risk of revision in patients with non-traumatic femoral head necrosis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies of patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA) due to femoral head necrosis (FHN) have shown an increased risk of revision compared to cases with primary osteoarthritis (POA), but recent studies have suggested that this procedure is not associated with poor outcome. We compared the risk of revision after operation with THA due to FHN or POA in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database including Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 427,806 THAs performed between 1995 and 2011 were included. The relative risk of revision for any reason, for aseptic loosening, dislocation, deep infection, and periprosthetic fracture was studied before and after adjustment for covariates using Cox regression models. RESULTS: 416,217 hips with POA (mean age 69 (SD 10), 59% females) and 11,589 with FHN (mean age 65 (SD 16), 58% females) were registered. The mean follow-up was 6.3 (SD 4.3) years. After 2 years of observation, 1.7% in the POA group and 3.0% in the FHN group had been revised. The corresponding proportions after 16 years of observation were 4.2% and 6.1%, respectively. The 16-year survival in the 2 groups was 86% (95% CI: 86-86) and 77% (CI: 74-80). After adjusting for covariates, the relative risk (RR) of revision for any reason was higher in patients with FHN for both periods studied (up to 2 years: RR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.34-1.54; p < 0.001; and 2-16 years: RR = 1.25, 1.14-1.38; p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Patients with FHN had an overall increased risk of revision. This increased risk persisted over the entire period of observation and covered more or less all of the 4 most common reasons for revision.

Complications after intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures in a low-income country.

BACKGROUND: Some surgeons believe that internal fixation of fractures carries too high a risk of infection in low-income countries (LICs) to merit its use there. However, there have been too few studies from LICs with sufficient follow-up to support this belief. We first wanted to determine whether complete follow-up could be achieved in an LIC, and secondly, we wanted to find the true microbial infection rate at our hospital and to examine the influence of HIV infection and lack of follow-up on outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 137 patients with 141 femoral fractures that were treated with intramedullary (IM) nailing were included. We compared outcomes in patients who returned for scheduled follow-up and patients who did not return but who could be contacted by phone or visited in their home village. RESULTS: 79 patients returned for follow-up as scheduled; 29 of the remaining patients were reached by phone or outreach visits, giving a total follow-up rate of 79%. 7 patients (5%) had a deep postoperative infection. All of them returned for scheduled follow-up. There were no infections in patients who did not return for follow-up, as compared to 8 of 83 nails in the group that did return as scheduled (p = 0.1). 2 deaths occurred in HIV-positive patients (2/23), while no HIV-negative patients (0/105) died less than 30 days after surgery (p = 0.03). INTERPRETATION: We found an acceptable infection rate. The risk of infection should not be used as an argument against IM nailing of femoral fractures in LICs. Many patients in Malawi did not return for follow-up because they had no complaints concerning the fracture. There was an increased postoperative mortality rate in HIV-positive patients.

Influence of hospital volume on revision rate after total knee arthroplasty with cement.

BACKGROUND: The number of total knee replacements has substantially increased worldwide over the past ten years. Several studies have indicated a correlation between high hospital procedure volume and decreased morbidity and mortality following total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether there is a correlation between procedure volume and the risk of revision following total knee arthroplasty with use of hospital volume data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. METHODS: Thirty-seven thousand, three hundred and eighty-one total knee arthroplasties that were reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register from 1994 to 2010 were used to examine the annual procedure volume per hospital. Hospital volume was divided into five categories according to the number of procedures performed annually: one to twenty-four (low volume), twenty-five to forty-nine (medium volume), fifty to ninety-nine (medium volume), 100 to 149 (high volume), and ≥150 (high volume). Cox regression (adjusted for age, sex, and diagnosis) was used to estimate the proportion of procedures without revision and the risk ratio (RR) of revision. Analyses were also performed for two commonly used prosthesis brands combined. RESULTS: The rate of prosthetic survival at ten years was 92.5% (95% confidence interval, 91.5 to 93.4) for hospitals with an annual volume of one to twenty-four procedures and 95.5% (95% confidence interval, 94.1 to 97.0) for hospitals with an annual volume of ≥150 procedures. We found a significantly lower risk of revision for hospitals with an annual volume of 100 to 149 procedures (relative risk = 0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 0.96], p = 0.03) and ≥150 procedures (relative risk = 0.73 [95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 1.00], p = 0.05) compared with hospitals with an annual volume of one to twenty-four procedures. Similar results were found when we analyzed two commonly used prosthesis brands. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, there was a significantly higher rate of revision knee arthroplasties at low-volume hospitals as compared with high-volume hospitals.

Risk factors for infection after 46,113 intramedullary nail operations in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The fields of surgery and trauma care have largely been neglected in the global health discussion. As a result the idea that surgery is not safe or cost effective in resource-limited settings has gone unchallenged. The SIGN Online Surgical Database (SOSD) is now one of the largest databases on trauma surgery in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). We wished to examine infection rates and risk factors for infection after IM nail operations in LMIC using this data. METHODS: The SOSD contained 46,722 IM nail surgeries in 58 different LMIC; 46,113 IM nail operations were included for analysis. RESULTS: The overall follow-up rate was 23.1 %. The overall infection rate was 1.0 %, 0.7 % for humerus, 0.8 % for femur, and 1.5 % for tibia fractures. If only nails with registered follow-up (n = 10,684) were included in analyses, infection rates were 2.9 % for humerus, 3.2 % for femur, and 6.9 % for tibia fractures. Prophylactic antibiotics reduced the risk of infection by 29 %. Operations for non-union had a doubled risk of infection. Risk of infection was reduced with increasing income level of the country. CONCLUSIONS: The overall infection rates were low, and well within acceptable levels, suggesting that it is safe to do IM nailing in low-income countries. The fact that operations for non-union have twice the risk of infection compared to primary fracture surgery further supports the use of IM nailing as the primary treatment for femur fractures in LMIC.

Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses.

PURPOSE: Functional results of reversed total prostheses (RTP) have-to a very limited degree-been compared with those of other shoulder prosthesis types. The aim of our study was to compare results of four different types of shoulder prostheses in terms of function, pain, and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Questionnaires were completed by 859 patients with shoulder prostheses registered in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Patients with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), or fracture sequela (FS) were included. Symptoms and function were assessed using the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS, scale 0-48), and the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) was used to assess QoL. RESULTS: Best functional results were obtained using conventional total prostheses (TPs) and RTPs -mean OSS improvement 18 and 16 units, respectively, vs 11 with hemiprostheses (HPs). For patients with OA, TPs performed best; for those with RA and FS, RTPs performed best; and those with HPs had the worst results in all diagnostic groups. The greatest improvement in QoL was seen in patients with TPs and RTPs. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional TPs provide the best improvement in pain, function and QoL in OA patients; RTPs are superior in patients with RA and FS.