Prevalence and patterns of neuropathic pain in people with chronic post-surgical pain after total knee arthroplasty.

Aims: The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence and patterns of neuropathic pain over one year in a cohort of patients with chronic post-surgical pain at three months following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: Between 2016 and 2019, 363 patients with troublesome pain, defined as a score of ≤ 14 on the Oxford Knee Score pain subscale, three months after TKA from eight UK NHS hospitals, were recruited into the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) clinical trial. Self-reported neuropathic pain and postoperative pain was assessed at three, nine, and 15 months after surgery using the painDETECT and Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaires collected by postal survey. Results: Symptoms of neuropathic pain were common among patients reporting chronic pain at three months post-TKA, with half reporting neuropathic pain on painDETECT (191/363; 53%) and 74% (267/359) on DN4. Of those with neuropathic pain at three months, half continued to have symptoms over the next 12 months (148/262; 56%), one-quarter had improved (67/262; 26%), and for one-tenth their neuropathic symptoms fluctuated over time (24/262; 9%). However, a subgroup of participants reported new, late onset neuropathic symptoms (23/262; 9%). Prevalence of neuropathic symptoms was similar between the screening tools when the lower cut-off painDETECT score (≥ 13) was applied. Overall, mean neuropathic pain scores improved between three and 15 months after TKA. Conclusion: Neuropathic pain is common in patients with chronic pain at three months after TKA. Although neuropathic symptoms improved over time, up to half continued to report painful neuropathic symptoms at 15 months after TKA. Postoperative care should include screening, assessment, and treatment of neuropathic pain in patients with early chronic postoperative pain after TKA.

The STAR care pathway for patients with chronic pain after total knee replacement: four-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) care pathway is a clinically important and cost-effective intervention found to improve pain outcomes over one year for people with chronic pain three months after total knee replacement (TKR). We followed up STAR trial participants to evaluate the longer-term clinical- and cost-effectiveness of this care pathway. METHODS: Participants who remained enrolled on the trial at one year were contacted by post at a median of four years after randomisation and invited to complete a questionnaire comprising the same outcomes collected during the trial. We captured pain (co-primary outcome using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity and interference scales; scored 0-10, best to worst), function, neuropathic characteristics, emotional aspects of pain, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction. Electronic hospital informatics data on hospital resource use for the period of one to four years post-randomisation were collected from participating hospital sites. The economic evaluation took an National Health Service (NHS) secondary care perspective, with a four-year time horizon. RESULTS: Overall, 226/337 (67%) of participants returned completed follow-up questionnaires, yielding adjusted between-group differences in BPI means of -0.42 (95% confidence interval, CI (-1.07, 0.23); p = 0.20) for pain severity and - 0.64 (95% CI -1.41, 0.12); p = 0.10) for pain interference. Analysis using a multiple imputed data set (n = 337) showed an incremental net monetary benefit in favour of the STAR care pathway of £3,525 (95% CI -£990 to £8,039) at a £20,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, leading to a probability that the intervention was cost-effective of 0.94. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of the longer-term benefits of the STAR care pathway are uncertain due to attrition of trial participants; however, there is a suggestion of some degree of sustained clinical benefit at four years. The care pathway remained cost-effective at four years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 92,545,361.

Healthcare professionals' views on implementing the STAR care pathway for people with chronic pain after total knee replacement: A qualitative study.

For many people with advanced osteoarthritis, total knee replacement is an effective treatment to relieve pain and improve function. However, 10-34% of people experience chronic postsurgical pain in the months and years after total knee replacement. The Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) randomised controlled trial (ISCRTN92545361) evaluated the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a new multifaceted and personalised care pathway, compared with usual care, for people with pain at three months after total knee replacement. Our objective was to identify factors promoting or inhibiting its implementation, and to inform future training and wider implementation of the pathway. We conducted a prospective process evaluation using qualitative interviews with eight Extended Scope Practitioners and six Principal Investigators from seven trial sites who were involved in delivering the STAR care pathway during the trial. We used Normalization Process Theory as a theoretical framework for qualitative data collection and content analysis. We identified that factors promoting the implementation of the pathway were quick familiarisation with the pathway, valuing patient-centredness, formalising referral processes, and increasing confidence to address neuropathic pain. Challenges to implementation were availability of time and resources, sensitivity in referral process, and ensuring collective understanding of the pathway. These findings have enabled us to make recommendations about the future implementation of the STAR care pathway and will inform the development of a training package, and updated manual for successful delivery in usual care. Furthermore, this model of care has potential value in diverse elective surgeries and pain conditions.

Primary care consultations and pain medicine prescriptions: a comparison between patients with and without chronic pain after total knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients experience chronic pain after total knee replacement (TKR). The impact of chronic pain after TKR on primary care services in the UK is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to compare primary care consultations and pain medicine prescriptions between patients with and without chronic pain after TKR. METHODS: Data from 5,055 patients who received TKR between 2009 and 2016 with anonymised linked data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold (CPRD) and English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) programme were analysed. The exposure time was from 10 years pre-operative to eight years post-operative. Patients with a score ≤ 14 on the Oxford Knee Score pain component scale at 6 months post-operative were classified as having chronic pain after TKR. Primary care consultations and prescribed pain medicines were quantified, and costs calculated based on national cost data. RESULTS: 721 patients (14%) had chronic pain after TKR. The prevalence and costs of primary care consultations and pain medicine prescriptions per year were consistently higher for patients with chronic pain after TKR compared with those without chronic pain after TKR; these differences were observed both before and after surgery. There was a substantial and sustained increase in the cost of opioid prescriptions after surgery for patients with chronic pain after TKR, peaking at seven years post-operative. CONCLUSIONS: Increased primary care consultations and pain medicine prescriptions associated with chronic pain after TKR represent a considerable financial cost to primary care services. Evaluation of interventions to reduce the risk of developing this pain condition and improve the early management of pain after TKR are needed to improve outcomes for patients and reduce costs to healthcare services.

Single-stage repair of displaced bucket-handle meniscal tears with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction leads to good meniscal survivorship : a retrospective cohort study.

AIMS: The best surgical strategy for the management of displaced bucket-handle (BH) meniscal tears in an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knee is unclear. Combining meniscal repair with ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is thought to improve meniscal healing rates; however, patients with displaced BH meniscal tears may lack extension. This leads some to advocate staged surgery to avoid postoperative stiffness and loss of range of motion (ROM) following ACLR. METHODS: We reviewed the data for a consecutive series of 88 patients (mean age 27.1 years (15 to 49); 65 male (74%) and 23 female (26%)) who underwent single-stage repair of a displaced BH meniscal tear (67 medial (76%) and 21 lateral (24%)) with concomitant hamstring autograft ACLR. The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), EuroQol five-dimension health questionnaire (EQ-5D), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), and Tegner score were recorded at final follow-up. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to estimate meniscal repair survivorship. Analyses were performed with different cut-offs for meniscal and ACL injury-to-surgery time (within three weeks, three to ten weeks, and more than ten weeks). RESULTS: Meniscal repair survivorship at a median final follow-up of 55 months (interquartile range (IQR) 24 to 91) was 82% (95% confidence interval 70 to 89). A total of 13 meniscus repairs failed (12 requiring meniscectomy and one requiring a further meniscal repair). At final follow-up, median PROMs were: EQ-VAS 85 (IQR 75 to 90), EQ-5D Index 0.84 (IQR 0.74 to 1.00), KOOS Pain 89 (IQR 80 to 94), KOOS Symptoms 82 (IQR 71 to 93), KOOS Activities of Daily Living 97 (IQR 91 to 100), KOOS Sport and Recreation 80 (IQR 65 to 90), KOOS Quality of Life 69 (IQR 53 to 86), IKDC 82.8 (IQR 67.8 to 90.8), and Tegner 6 (IQR 4 to 7). Two patients underwent revision ACLR following further injuries. One patient had an arthroscopic washout for infection at 11 days post-BH meniscal repair/ACLR. Four patients (4.5%) required a further procedure for stiffness, reduced ROM, and pain, and all were operated on within three weeks of meniscal injury. There was no difference in the interval between meniscal injury and surgery between repairs that failed and those that survived. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that concomitant ACLR with repair of displaced BH meniscal tears, even if they have been displaced for some time, appears to afford satisfactory PROMs and good survivorship. Repairs within three weeks of meniscal injury may be associated with higher rates of postoperative reintervention for stiffness. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):680-686.

Does Partial Knee Replacement Allow Return to High-Demand Activities?

Purpose  The purpose of this study was to assess postoperative partial knee replacement (PKR) functional improvement using the postoperative Oxford Knee Score for Activity and Participation Questionnaire (OKS-APQ). PKR includes medial, lateral, and patellofemoral knee arthroplasty. Methods A search of a National Health Service hospital database was made to identify eligible candidates for a survey of Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM). Database records were collected for patients who had medial, lateral, and patellofemoral knee arthroplasty. The first author, an orthopaedic surgery resident, retrospectively reviewed the data and selected 318 patient records for inclusion in a questionnaire survey. The inclusion criteria were: patients who had PKR within three years from the time of the study and patients who don't have medical problems that may affect their mobility; for example, balance problems. The survey used the postoperative Oxford Knee Score for Activity and Participation Questionnaire (OKS-APQ), Tegner Activity Score (TAS), and four questions were added to the present study, namely, three free-text questions and one visual analogue score (VAS). The survey was sent by post seeking the patients' responses. Results  Two-hundred five responded to the survey out of 318; a 64% response rate. The ceiling and floor effects were determined from patients' answers. Survey questions included: What is the most demanding activity you routinely do every month on your new knee? The patients' answers were divided into four groups. First, 29% were limited to low functional demand activities, for example, light walking for less than a mile. Second, 43% were involved in domestic work and sports activities, for example, golf, skittles, bowling, squatting, swimming, and gardening. Third, 21% had progressed to higher demand activities, for instance, dancing, racquet sports, cycling, and yoga. Fourth, 7% were performing higher demand activities involving impacts, for example, skiing, heavy gym workout, and marathon running. Conclusion The postoperative questionnaire demonstrated activities ranging from high-impact activities, for example, skiing, and from higher demand activities, for example, dancing to low function activities, for example, light walking.

Use of a Novel Variable Power Radiofrequency Ablation System Specific for Knee Chondroplasty: Surgical Experience and Two-Year Patient Results.

Introduction Although stabilisation of knee cartilage lesions (chondroplasty) may be performed with an arthroscopic shaver, more recently, radiofrequency (RF) ablation has gained in popularity. However, their remain some concerns about the avoidance of thermal injury, chondrolysis, and osteonecrosis with the use of RF devices. Methods We reviewed the outcomes of 85 knee chondroplasties performed with a new RF ablation wand designed for knee chondroplasty. Lesion details and Chondropaenia Severity Score (CSS) were recorded for each patient. We evaluated the occurrence of adverse outcomes, post-operative complications, and the need for further surgery. Post-operative outcomes scores (Oxford Knee Score [OKS], Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], and International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective knee outcome) were recorded at a minimum of one-year follow-up. Results At the final mean follow-up of 27.5 months (range: 12-46.6 months), 12 (14%) knees had undergone or were listed for further surgery. Four patients had corticosteroid injections for ongoing pain at a median 7.5 months (range: 5-20 months) post-operatively. There were no observed re-operations considered to be caused by complications related to thermal injury. Of the six patients listed for or undergoing knee arthroplasty, five (83%) had grade 4 lesions found at the arthroscopic chondroplasty. A negative correlation was noted between CCS, and post-operative IKDC subjective score (R=-0.35), KOOS Sports (R=-0.39), and KOOS QoL (R=-0.36). Conclusions We found that RF chondroplasty appeared safe, and there were no concerns with regard to thermal injury. Functional outcome appeared to be related to the quality of chondral and meniscal tissue throughout all knee compartments, with better results for isolated grade 2 and 3 cartilage lesions.

Kneeling ability after total knee replacement.

Kneeling ability is consistently the poorest patient-rated outcome after total knee replacement (TKR), with 60-80% of patients reporting difficulty kneeling or an inability to kneel.Difficulty kneeling impacts on many activities and areas of life, including activities of daily living, self-care, leisure and social activities, religious activities, employment and getting up after a fall. Given the wide range of activities that involve kneeling, and the expectation that this will be improved with surgery, problems kneeling after TKR are a source of dissatisfaction and disappointment for many patients.Research has found that there is no association between range of motion and self-reported kneeling ability. More research is needed to understand if and how surgical factors contribute to difficulty kneeling after TKR.Discrepancies between patients' self-reported ability to kneel and observed ability suggests that patients can kneel but elect not to. Reasons for this are multifactorial, including knee pain/discomfort, numbness, fear of harming the prosthesis, co-morbidities and recommendations from health professionals. There is currently no evidence that there is any clinical reason why patients should not kneel on their replaced knee, and reasons for not kneeling could be addressed through education and rehabilitation.There has been little research to evaluate the provision of healthcare services and interventions for patients who find kneeling problematic after TKR. Increased clinical awareness of this poor outcome and research to inform the provision of services is needed to improve patient care and allow patients to return to this important activity. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:460-467. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180085.

Outcome of revision UKR to TKR when compared to a matched group of TKR of same total arthroplasty lifespan.

AIM: To compare outcomes of revision uni-compartmental knee replacement (UKR) with a defined revision cause with a matched group of primary total knee replacements (TKR). BACKGROUND: UKR accounts for 8.7% of knee arthroplasty in the UK each year. It has better functional outcome than total knee replacement for isolated single compartment arthritis but can result in complex surgery when revision is required. This is feared to result in poorer patient reported outcomes when compared to primary TKR. We aim to compare the clinical results of revised UKR with primary TKR, taking into account the survival length of the UKR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-five patients (27 female) were retrospectively identified from our arthroplasty database that had undergone revision from UKR to TKR (1999-2014) and had a minimum of two years of follow-up post-revision. These patients were then matched with regards to age at primary procedure, sex, BMI and total arthroplasty life (UKR + Revision TKR) up to point of follow-up. RESULTS: In the UKR revision group (mean arthroplasty life 8.6 years) the mean Oxford knee score (OKS) was 31.8. In the primary knee group (mean arthroplasty life 8.4 years) the mean OKS was 32.8. This difference was not statistically significant. Fifteen out of 45 patients undergoing revision surgery required stemmed components. CONCLUSION: UKR provides comparable clinical outcome even after revision surgery to TKR as primary TKRs and should be considered in all patients meeting the selection criteria. Revision is complex and revision components should be available.

Clinical descriptors for the recognition of central sensitization pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Despite growing awareness of the contribution of central pain mechanisms to knee osteoarthritis pain in a subgroup of patients, routine evaluation of central sensitization is yet to be incorporated into clinical practice. AIM: The objective of this perspective is to design a set of clinical descriptors for the recognition of central sensitization in patients with knee osteoarthritis that can be implemented in clinical practice. METHODS: A narrative review of original research papers was conducted by nine clinicians and researchers from seven different countries to reach agreement on clinically relevant descriptors. RESULTS: It is proposed that identification of a dominance of central sensitization pain is based on descriptors derived from the subjective assessment and the physical examination. In the former, clinicians are recommended to inquire about intensity and duration of pain and its association with structural joint changes, pain distribution, behavior of knee pain, presence of neuropathic-like or centrally mediated symptoms and responsiveness to previous treatment. The latter includes assessment of response to clinical test, mechanical hyperalgesia and allodynia, thermal hyperalgesia, hypoesthesia and reduced vibration sense. CONCLUSIONS: This article describes a set of clinically relevant descriptors that might indicate the presence of central sensitization in patients with knee osteoarthritis in clinical practice. Although based on research data, the descriptors proposed in this review require experimental testing in future studies. Implications for Rehabilitation Laboratory evaluation of central sensitization for people with knee osteoarthritis is yet to be incorporated into clinical practice. A set of clinical indicators for the recognition of central sensitization in patients with knee osteoarthritis is proposed. Although based on research data, the clinical indicators proposed require further experimental testing of psychometric properties.

Results of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction compared with trochleoplasty plus individual extensor apparatus balancing in patellar instability caused by severe trochlear dysplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Many studies have reported satisfactory clinical outcomes and low redislocation rates after reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) for the treatment of lateral patellar instability. Despite uncorrected severe trochlear dysplasia (Dejour type B to D) being acknowledged as a major reason for less favourable clinical outcomes and a higher incidence of patellar redislocations after an isolated MPFL reconstruction, the evidence for a deepening trochleoplasty procedure remains scarce in the current literature. The hypothesis of this systematic review and meta-analysis was that a deepening trochleoplasty in combination with an a la carte extensor apparatus balancing procedure provides lower redislocation rates and superior clinical outcomes than isolated MPFL reconstruction in patients with lateral patellar instability caused by severe trochlear dysplasia. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria for clinical studies reporting index operations (trochleoplasty and MPFL reconstruction) for the treatment of patellar instability caused by severe trochlear dysplasia. The Kujala score was analysed as the primary clinical outcome parameter in a random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Ten uncontrolled studies with a total of 407 knees (374 patients) were included in this analysis. The MPFL group comprised 4 studies with a total of 221 knees (210 patients), and the trochleoplasty group comprised 6 studies with a total of 186 knees (164 patients). The mean preoperative Kujala score ranged between 50.4 and 70.5 in the MPFL group and between 44.8 and 75.1 in the trochleoplasty group. The pooled Kujala score increased significantly by 26.4 (95% CI 21.4, 31.3; P < 0.00001) points in the MPFL group and by 26.2 (95% CI 19.8, 32.7; P < 0.00001) points in the trochleoplasty group. The post-operative patellar redislocation/subluxation rate was 7% in the MPFL group and 2.1% in the trochleoplasty group. CONCLUSION: This analysis found significant post-operative improvements in patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing both an MPFL reconstruction and in those undergoing a trochleoplasty plus an individual extensor apparatus balancing procedure when assessed using the Kujala score. The likelihood of preventing the patella from subsequent post-operative redislocation/subluxation was, however, greater in patients who underwent trochleoplasty plus extensor balancing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Human-factors training for surgical trainees.

BACKGROUND: Shortcomings in non-technical skills have frequently been shown to play a role in adverse events during surgery. Human-factors training has an increasing role to play in enhancing patient safety and reducing medical errors. Programmes in non-technical skills are promoted by the surgical Royal Colleges in the UK and Ireland, and are currently aimed at consultants, senior trainees and theatre teams. Since 2009, the Severn Postgraduate Deanery School of Surgery in the UK has developed a 1-day human-factors training course specifically designed for junior surgical trainees. METHODS: Analysis of post-course feedback on self-assessed confidence in the use of non-technical skills was undertaken for all junior surgical trainees undertaking the course in 2012/13. RESULTS: Thirty-three junior surgical trainees attended the 1-day human-factors training course. In all, 91 per cent of trainees reported that the course would change their practice. There was a statistically significant difference between the self-assessed confidence of trainees in the use of all four categories of non-technical skills (p ≤ 0.001) before and after the course. DISCUSSION: The Severn Deanery offers a compulsory human-factors training course for surgeons at the start of their career. Given the importance of reducing human error, maintaining patient safety and the introduction of competency-based training with an emphasis on simulation, human-factors training has a vital place in surgical training, and is highly recommended to others involved in training junior surgical trainees.

Interobserver and intraobserver reliability assessment of calcaneal fracture classification systems.

The aim of the present study was to assess the reliability of commonly used intra-articular calcaneal fracture classification systems and to compare them with the newer AO Integral Classification of Injuries (ICI) system. Forty computed tomography and radiographic images of 40 intra-articular calcaneal fractures were reviewed independently by 3 reviewers on 2 separate occasions and classified according to the Essex-Lopresti, Atkins, Zwipp and Tscherne, Sanders, and AO-ICI classification systems. The reviewers were unaware of the patients' identity and all aspects of clinical care. The data were analyzed using kappa (κ) statistics to assess the intra- and interobserver reliability. The κ values were calculated for Essex-Lopresti (κ = 0.85 intraobserver, κ = 0.78 interobserver), Atkins (κ = 0.42 intraobserver, κ = 0.73 interobserver), Zwipp and Tscherne (κ = 0.40 intraobserver, κ = 0.47 interobserver), Sanders (κ = 0.31 intraobserver, κ = 0.35 interobserver), and AO-ICI (κ = 0.41 intraobserver, κ = 0.33 interobserver). The AO-ICI classification system had levels of reproducibility similar to that of the Sanders classification, currently the most widely used system. The Essex-Lopresti classification demonstrated improved reliability compared with that reported in previous studies. This can be attributed to using sagittal computed tomography images, in addition to the originally described plain radiographs, for assessment. This improvement is relevant because of its accepted prognostic predictability.

Acute knee dislocation: an evidence based approach to the management of the multiligament injured knee.

Traumatic knee dislocations are uncommon yet serious injuries that historically have had variable prognosis. The evaluation and management of traumatic knee dislocations remains controversial. Appropriate early management has been shown to have a significant impact on long term functional outcome. A comprehensive review of the recent literature is presented alongside our current approach to management. The dislocated knee is an under diagnosed injury which relies on a high index of clinical suspicion on presentation of any knee injury. There is now a degree of consensus regarding need for surgery, timing of surgery, vascular investigations, surgical techniques and rehabilitation protocols. Vigilant monitoring for neurovascular complications, appropriate investigations and early involvement of surgeons with a specialist interest in knee ligament surgeries is the key to successful management of these difficult injuries.

Motion analysis: a validated method for showing skill levels in arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to show the validity of a motion analysis system in its ability to differentiate between surgeons and non-surgeons when performing simple arthroscopic tasks. METHODS: We divided 35 subjects into a surgeons group (n = 20) and a non-surgeons group (n = 15). The surgeons group was further subdivided based on the amount of previous arthroscopic experience. Each participant performed 2 separate simulated arthroscopic tasks while being assessed with motion analysis equipment. The time taken, total path length, and number of movements were recorded. RESULTS: A significant difference in performance was identified between surgeons and non-surgeons (P < .0001) and between senior and junior surgeons (P < .05). We identified trends toward decreased time taken and improved economy of movement with increasing arthroscopic experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the validity of a motion analysis system as a means of objective assessment of arthroscopic skills in orthopaedics. The system has been shown to differentiate between non-surgeons, junior surgeons, and senior surgeons in performing simple arthroscopic tasks. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In the context of concerns regarding reductions in training time, this study validates the use of a simple, affordable, and reliable means of objective assessment of arthroscopic skills and training in such skills. The motion analysis system could subsequently be used as an adjunct to more traditional methods of assessment when planning strategies to teach, learn, and practice arthroscopic skills in the future.