Understanding the 30-day mortality burden after revision total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a challenging procedure that burdens the healthcare system. Despite being associated with worse outcomes relative to its primary counterpart, postoperative mortality after revision THA remains ill-defined. The present study aimed to (1) establish the overall 30-day mortality rate after revision THA and (2) explore the mortality rate stratified by age, comorbidity burden, and aseptic versus septic failure. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent revision THA from 2011 to 2019. A total of 23,501 patients were identified and grouped into mortality (n = 161) and mortality-free (n = 23,340) cohorts. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and aseptic/septic failure were evaluated. RESULTS: The overall 30-day mortality was 0.69%. The mortality rate by age group (normalised per 1000 patients) was 0 (18-39 years [Y]), 0.67 (40-49 Y), 1.10 (50-59 Y), 2.58 (60-69 Y), 6.15 (70-79 Y) 19.32 (80-89 Y), and 58.22 (90+Y) (p < 0.001). The mortality rate by ASA classification (normalised per 1000 patients) was 0 (ASA I), 1.47 (ASA II), 6.94 (ASA III), 45.42 (ASA IV), and 200 (ASA V) (p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality rate for the septic and aseptic cohorts was 1.03% and 0.65%, respectively (p = 0.038). CCI scores (p < 0.001), diabetes (p < 0.001), systematic sepsis (p < 0.001), poor functional status (p < 0.001), BMI < 24.9 kg/m2 (p < 0.001), and dirty/infected wounds (p < 0.001) were all associated with increased mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: 1 in 145 patients will suffer mortality during the 30 days after revision THA. PJI-related revision THA was associated with 1.5-fold increase in 30-day mortality rate compared to its aseptic counterpart. Certain patient determinants and baseline comorbidities, as measured by ASA and CCI scores, were associated with higher 30-day mortality rates. Therefore, it is imperative to identify such risk factors and implement perioperative patient optimisation pathways to mitigate the risk among vulnerable patients.

Wear resistance of first-generation highly cross-linked annealed polyethylene in cementless total hip arthroplasty is maintained 20 years after surgery.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of first-generation annealed highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 29 patients (35 hips) who underwent THA between December 2000 and February 2002. The survival rate was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hip joint function was evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Two-dimensional polyethylene wear was estimated using Martell's Hip Analysis Suite. We calculated the wear rates between years 1 and 5, 5 and 10, 10 and 15, and 15 and final follow-up. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 19.1 years (SD 0.6; 17.3 to 20.1). The 19-year overall survival rate with the end point of all-cause revision was 97.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91 to 100). The mean JOA score improved from 43.2 (SD 10.6; 30 to 76) before surgery to 90.2 (SD 6.4; 76 to 98) at the final follow-up (p < 0.001). There was no osteolysis or loosening of the acetabular or femoral components. The overall steady-state wear rate was 0.013 mm/year (SD 0.012). There was no hip with a steady-state wear rate of > 0.1 mm/year. There was no significant difference in wear rates for each period. We found no significant correlation between the wear rate and age, body weight, BMI, or cup inclination. CONCLUSION: First-generation annealed HXLPE shows excellent wear resistance and no acceleration of wear for approximately 20 years, with low all-cause revision rates. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(2):200-205.

The Influences of Spinopelvic Parameters and Associated Factors on Development of Proximal Instrumented Fracture After Posterior Instrumentation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate influences of spinopelvic parameters, such as lumbar lordosis (LL) angles, pelvic incidence, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, and sagittal vertical axis, on development of the proximal junctional failure fracture type after posterior instrumentation. METHODS: This retrospective 1:3 matched case-control cohort study included 24 patients who developed proximal instrumented fracture in the study group and 72 patients without proximal junctional failure in the control group. Weighted Charlson Comorbidity Index and bone mineral density with T-score were recorded. In addition to spinopelvic parameters, proximal local kyphosis (PLK), which refers to a kyphosis angle between the upper end plate of upper instrumented vertebra plus 1 level and the lower end plate of upper instrumented vertebra; pelvic incidence-LL mismatch; and spinopelvic realignment score were calculated. RESULTS: More comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index, P = 0.002) and poorer bone density (T-score, P = 0.001) were noted in the study group. Before surgery, the study group had significantly lower LL (P = 0.046) and sacral slope (P = 0.043) and significantly higher PLK (P < 0.001) and pelvic tilt (P = 0.044) than the control group. Postoperatively, the study group had significantly higher PLK (P < 0.001) and lower LL (P = 0.031) than the control group; the degree of pelvic incidence-LL mismatch (P = 0.007) remained significantly higher in the study group. Preoperative (P = 0.026) and postoperative (P = 0.045) spinopelvic realignment scores was worse in the study group. Multivariate analysis revealed that postoperative PLK was the most significant radiographic factor to predict proximal instrumented fracture (P = 0.002, odds ratio 1.140, 95% confidence interval). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, appropriate LL and lower PLK should be obtained at surgery to prevent development of instrumented fracture.

Ten-year survival of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 60 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) with ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) was created to minimise wear debris and aseptic loosening. A decade ago, a meta-analysis showed a 10-year survival rate of just 89%. Based on the excellent tribology of the current CoC, significant improvement of implant survivorship is expected. In patients younger than 60, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess 10-year survival and complications after using current primary CoC THA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Virtual Health Library, and Cochrane Library were used to scan for published trials that met the inclusion criteria until January 2019. The qualified studies were subjected to a systematic review and proportional analysis, and the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in a comparison meta-analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included 156 findings. The total number of hips was 2278. Nine studies were cohort, and four were RCTs between ceramic and polyethylene cups. The analysis revealed an average age of 44 years (range 24-54). The 10-year survival 96% (95% CI; 95.4-96.8%), aseptic loosening rate 0.516. (95% CI; 0.265-0.903), ceramic fracture rate 0.620 (95% CI; 0.34-1.034) and squeaking rate 2.687 (95% CI; 1.279-4.593). A comparison meta-analysis revealed the risk ratio (RR) for revision was 0.27 (95% CI; 0.15-0.47), and for aseptic loosening 0.15 (0.03-0.70) favouring CoC, while RR for component fracture was 1.62 (95% CI; 0.27-9.66) favouring the polyethylene. CONCLUSION: In patients under sixty, current CoC THAs are correlated with better 10-year outcomes than before and have high survivorship rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

A novel tool for predicting the survival of endoprosthesis used for reconstruction of the knee following tumor resection: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Prosthesis-related complications, after knee reconstruction with endoprosthesis during operation for tumors around the knee, remain an unresolved problem which necessitate a revision or even an amputational surgery. The purpose of the current study was to identify significant risk factors associated with implant failure, and establish a novel model to predict survival of the prosthesis in patients operated with endoprostheses for tumor around knee. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical database of our institution for patients who underwent knee reconstruction due to tumors. A total of 203 patients were included, including 123 males (60.6%) and 80 (39.4%) females, ranging in age from 14 to 77 years (mean: 34.3 ± 17.3 years). The cohort was randomly divided into training (n = 156) and validation (n = 47) samples. Univariable COX analysis was used for initially identifying potential independent predictors of prosthesis survival with the training group (p < 0.150). Multivariate COX proportional hazard model was selected to identify final significant prognostic factors. Using these significant predictors, a graphic nomogram, and an online dynamic nomogram were generated for predicting the prosthetic survival. C-index and calibration curve were used for evaluate the discrimination ability and accuracy of the novel model, both in the training and validation groups. RESULTS: The 1-, 5-, and 10-year prosthetic survival rates were 94.0, 90.8, and 83.0% in training sample, and 96.7, 85.8, and 76.9% in validation sample, respectively. Anatomic sites, length of resection and length of prosthetic stem were independently associated with the prosthetic failure according to multivariate COX regression model (p<0.05). Using these three significant predictors, a graphical nomogram and an online dynamic nomogram model were generated. The C-indexes in training and validation groups were 0.717 and 0.726 respectively, demonstrating favourable discrimination ability of the novel model. And the calibration curve at each time point showed favorable consistency between the predicted and actual survival rates in training and validation samples. CONCLUSIONS: The length of resection, anatomical location of tumor, and length of prosthetic stem were significantly associated with prosthetic survival in patients operated for tumor around knee. A user-friendly novel online model model, with favorable discrimination ability and accuracy, was generated to help surgeons predict the survival of the prosthesis.

Pseudarthrosis and Rod Fracture Rates After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion at the Caudal Levels of Long Constructs for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Interbody fusion at the caudal levels of long constructs for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is used to promote fusion and secure a solid foundation for maintenance of deformity correction. We sought to evaluate long-term pseudarthrosis, rod fracture, and revision rates for TLIF performed at the base of a long construct for ASD. METHODS: We reviewed 316 patients who underwent TLIF as a component of ASD surgery for medical comorbidities, surgical characteristics, and rate of unplanned reoperation for pseudarthrosis or instrumentation failure at the TLIF level. Fusion grading was assessed after revision surgery for pseudarthrosis at the TLIF level. RESULTS: Rate of pseudarthrosis at the TLIF level was 9.8% (31/316), and rate of rod fractures was 7.9% (25/316). The rate of revision surgery at the TLIF level was 8.9% (28/316), and surgery was performed at a mean of 20.4 ± 16 months from the index procedure. Current smoking status (odds ratio 3.34, P = 0.037) was predictive of pseudarthrosis at the TLIF site. At a mean follow-up of 43 ± 12 months after revision surgery, all patients had achieved bony union at the TLIF site. CONCLUSIONS: At 3-year follow-up, the rate of pseudarthrosis after TLIF performed at the base of a long fusion for ASD was 9.8%, and the rate of revision surgery to address pseudarthrosis and/or rod fracture was 8.9%. All patients were successfully treated with revision interbody fusion or posterior augmentation of the fusion mass, without need for further revision procedures at the TLIF level.

Revision Total Elbow Arthroplasty with the Semiconstrained Coonrad/Morrey Prosthesis: Follow-up to 21 Years.

BACKGROUND: Revision total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has increased, especially in young patients with high functional expectations. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term results of revision TEA with a single semiconstrained prosthesis. METHODS: Thirty-four revision TEAs were performed with a Coonrad/Morrey prosthesis in 32 patients; 2 patients had bilateral procedures. The mean patient age was 61 years (range, 22 to 76 years), and the revision TEA was performed at a mean time of 7.8 years (range, 1.6 to 21 years) after the primary TEA. Etiologies for revisions were humeral and ulnar aseptic loosening (n = 14), ulnar aseptic loosening (n = 8), humeral aseptic loosening (n = 6), septic arthritis (n = 4), and unstable unlinked prostheses (n = 2). Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed with systematic preoperative infection workup and quantification of bone loss. The mean follow-up was 11.4 years (range, 2 to 21 years). RESULTS: The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) at the last follow-up was excellent in 6 cases, good in 18 cases, fair in 8 cases, and poor in 2 cases, with a mean improvement (and standard deviation) between the preoperative values at 42.4 ± 16.1 points and the postoperative values at 81.8 ± 12 points (p < 0.001). The mean pain scores improved significantly from 6.7 ± 1.3 points preoperatively to 1.4 ± 1.4 points postoperatively (p < 0.001). The flexion-extension arc increased significantly (p = 0.02) from 74° ± 27° preoperatively to 100° ± 31° postoperatively. The total number of complications was 29 in 19 revision TEAs (56%). Twenty of the 29 complications simply required monitoring without surgical intervention. Six repeat surgical procedures were required, and 3 implant revisions (9%) were performed. CONCLUSIONS: Revision TEA with a semiconstrained prosthesis can provide good clinical results that can be maintained during follow-up. The rate of complications is high. Proper evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio is essential for each revision TEA and should be discussed with the patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Structural Deterioration of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Bioprostheses in the PARTNER-2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether transcatheter valves will have similar durability as surgical bioprosthetic valves. Definitions of structural valve deterioration (SVD), based on valve related reintervention or death, underestimate the incidence of SVD. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine and compare the 5-year incidence of SVD, using new standardized definitions based on echocardiographic follow-up of valve function, in intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis given transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) 2A trial and registry. METHODS: In the PARTNER 2A trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either TAVR with the SAPIEN XT or SAVR, whereas in the SAPIEN 3 registry, patients were assigned to TAVR with the SAPIEN 3. The primary endpoint was the incidence of SVD, that is, the composite of SVD-related hemodynamic valve deterioration during echocardiographic follow-up and/or SVD-related bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) at 5 years. RESULTS: Compared with SAVR, the SAPIEN-XT TAVR cohort had a significantly higher 5-year exposure adjusted incidence rates (per 100 patient-years) of SVD (1.61 ± 0.24% vs. 0.63 ± 0.16%), SVD-related BVF (0.58 ± 0.14% vs. 0.12 ± 0.07%), and all-cause (structural or nonstructural) BVF (0.81 ± 0.16% vs. 0.27 ± 0.10%) (p ≤ 0.01 for all). The 5-year rates of SVD (0.68 ± 0.18% vs. 0.60 ± 0.17%; p = 0.71), SVD-related BVF (0.29 ± 0.12% vs. 0.14 ± 0.08%; p = 0.25), and all-cause BVF (0.60 ± 0.15% vs. 0.32 ± 0.11%; p = 0.32) in SAPIEN 3 TAVR were not significantly different to a propensity score matched SAVR cohort. The 5-year rates of SVD and SVD-related BVF were significantly lower in SAPIEN 3 versus SAPIEN XT TAVR matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SAVR, the second-generation SAPIEN XT balloon-expandable valve has a higher 5-year rate of SVD, whereas the third-generation SAPIEN 3 has a rate of SVD that was not different from SAVR. (The PARTNER II Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves - PII A [PARTNERII A]; NCT01314313; The PARTNER II Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves II - PARTNER II - PARTNERII - S3 Intermediate [PARTNERII S3i]; NCT03222128).

Factors associated with implant survival following total hip replacement surgery: A registry study of data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 100,000 people underwent total hip replacement (THR) in the United Kingdom in 2018, and most can expect it to last at least 25 years. However, some THRs fail and require revision surgery, which results in worse outcomes for the patient and is costly to the health service. Variation in the survival of THR implants has been observed between units and reducing this unwarranted variation is one focus of the "Getting it Right First Time" (GIRFT) program in the UK. We aimed to investigate whether the statistically improved implant survival of THRs in a high-performing unit is associated with the implants used or other factors at that unit, such as surgical skill. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analyzed a national, mandatory, prospective, cohort study (National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man [NJR]) of all THRs performed in England and Wales. We included the 664,761 patients with records in the NJR who have received a stemmed primary THR between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2017 in one of 461 hospitals, with osteoarthritis as the only indication. The exposure was the unit (hospital) in which the THR was implanted. We compared survival of THRs implanted in the "exemplar" unit with THRs implanted anywhere else in the registry. The outcome was revision surgery of any part of the THR construct for any reason. Net failure was calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates, and adjusted analyses employed flexible parametric survival analysis. The mean age of patients contributing to our analyses was 69.9 years (SD 10.1), and 61.1% were female. Crude analyses including all THRs demonstrated better implant survival at the exemplar unit with an all-cause construct failure of 1.7% (95% CI 1.3-2.3) compared with 2.9% (95% CI 2.8-3.0) in the rest of the country after 13.9 years (log-rank test P < 0.001). The same was seen in analyses adjusted for age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score (difference in restricted mean survival time 0.12 years [95% CI 0.07-0.16; P < 0.001]). Adjusted analyses restricted to the same implants as the exemplar unit show no demonstrable difference in restricted mean survival time between groups after 13.9 years (P = 0.34). A limitation is that this study is observational and conclusions regarding causality cannot be inferred. Our outcome is revision surgery, and although important, we recognize it is not the only marker of success of a THR. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the "better than expected" implant survival results of this exemplar center are associated with implant choice. The survival results may be replicated by adopting key treatment decisions, such as implant selection. These decisions are easier to replicate than technical skills or system factors.

Have newer bearing surfaces changed expectations regarding the longevity of total hip arthroplasty?

AIMS: The purpose of this study is to examine six types of bearing surfaces implanted at a single institution over three decades to determine whether the reasons for revision vary among the groups and how long it takes to identify differences in survival. METHODS: We considered six cohorts that included a total of 1,707 primary hips done between 1982 and 2010. These included 223 conventional polyethylene sterilized with γ irradiation in air (CPE-GA), 114 conventional polyethylene sterilized with gas plasma (CPE-GP), 116 crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE), 1,083 metal-on-metal (MOM), 90 ceramic-on-ceramic (COC), and 81 surface arthroplasties (SAs). With the exception of the COC, all other groups used cobalt-chromium (CoCr) femoral heads. The mean follow-up was 10 (0.008 to 35) years. Descriptive statistics with revisions per 100 component years (re/100 yr) and survival analysis with revision for any reason as the endpoint were used to compare bearing surfaces. RESULTS: XLPE liners demonstrated a lower cumulative incidence of revision at 15 years compared to the CPE-GA and CPE-GP groups owing to the absence of wear-related revisions (4% for XLPE vs 18%, p = 0.02, and 15%, p = 0.003, respectively). Revisions for adverse local tissue reactions occurred exclusively among the MOM (0.8 re/100 year) and SA groups (0.1 re/100 year). The revision rate for instability was lower among hips with 36 mm and larger head sizes compared to smaller head sizes (0.2% vs 2%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The introduction of XLPE has eliminated wear-related revisions through 15-year follow-up compared to CPE-GP and CPE-GA. Dislocation incidence has been reduced with the introduction of larger diameter heads but remains a persistent concern. The potential for adverse local tissue reactions with MOM requires continued follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):105-111.

Effect and potential risks of using multilevel cement-augmented pedicle screw fixation in osteoporotic spine with lumbar degenerative disease.

BACKGROUND: The increase of augmented level and bone cement dose are accompanied by the rising incidence of cement leakage (CL) of cement-augmented pedicle screw instrumentation (CAPSI). But the effect and potential risks of the application of CAPSI to osteoporotic lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) have not been studied in the case of multilevel fixation. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and potential complications of using multilevel CAPSI for patients with osteoporotic LDD. METHODS: A total of 93 patients with multilevel LDD were divided into the CAPSI group (46 subjects) and the conventional pedicle screw (CPS) group (47 subjects), including 75 cases for three levels and 18 cases for four levels. Relevant data were compared between two groups, including baseline data, clinical results, and complications. RESULTS: In the CAPSI group, a total of 336 augmented screws was placed bilaterally. The CL was observed in 116 screws (34.52%). Three cemented screws (0.89%) were found loosened during the follow-up and the overall fusion rate was 93.47%. For perioperative complications, two patients (4.35%) experienced pulmonary cement embolism (PCE), one patient augmented vertebral fracture, and three patients (6.52%) wound infection. And in the CPS group, thirty-three screws (8.46%) suffered loosening in cranial and caudal vertebra with a fusion rate of 91.49%. The operation time and hospital stay of CAPSI group were longer than the CPS group, but CAPSI group has a lower screw loosening percentage (P<0. 05). And in terms of blood loss, perioperative complications, fusion rate, and VAS and ODI scores at the follow-up times, there were no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with osteoporotic LDD underwent multilevel CPS fixation have a higher rate of screw loosening in the cranial and caudal vertebra. The application of cemented pedicle screws for multilevel LDD can achieve better stability and less screw loosening, but it also accompanied by longer operating time, higher incidence of CL, PCE and wound infections. Selective cement augmentation of cranial and caudal pedicle screws may be a worthy strategy to decrease the complications.

Mid-term and long-term results of restoring rotation center in revision hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: To restore rotation center exactly in revision hip arthroplasty is technically challenging, especially in Paprosky type III. The technical difficulty is attributable to the complicated acetabular bone defect. In this study, we discussed the method of restoring rotation center in revision hip arthroplasty and reported the clinical and radiological outcome of mid-term and long-term follow-up. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed 45 patients (48 hips) who underwent revision hip arthroplasty, in which 35 cases (35 hips) were available for complete follow-up data. During the operation, the acetabular bone defect was reconstructed by impaction morselized bone graft, and the hip rotation center was restored by using remnant Harris fossa and acetabular notches as the marks. The clinical outcome was assessed using the Harris hip score. Pelvis plain x-ray was used to assess implant migration, stability of implants, and incorporation of the bone graft to host bone. RESULT: The average follow-up duration was 97.60 months (range 72-168 months). The average Harris hip score improved from 29.54 ± 10.87 preoperatively to 83.77 ± 5.78 at the last follow-up. The vertical distance of hip rotation center measured on pelvis x-ray was restored to normal, with the mean distance (15.24 ± 1.31) mm (range 12.4~17.3 mm). The mean loss of vertical distance of hip rotation center was (2.21 ± 0.72) mm (range 1.1 ~ 5.3 mm) at the last follow-up. CONCLUSION: Satisfactory clinical and radiological outcome can be obtained through restoring hip rotation center by using remnant Harris fossa and acetabular notches as the anatomical marks in revision hip arthroplasty.

Has the Use of Fixation Techniques in THA Changed in This Decade? The Uncemented Paradox Revisited.

BACKGROUND: Despite existing studies favoring cemented fixation for patients older than 75 years, a trend toward increased use of uncemented fixation has been described in a 2013 study that used arthroplasty registry data from 2006 to 2010. Updated summarized data are needed beyond 2010 to investigate contemporary trends in the usage of uncemented fixation, especially in patients older than 75 years, and to draw attention to a potential continuing conflict between trends in fixation choice and reported revision risk. Thus, healthcare policy and practice can change and surgeons can make better implant fixation choices. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Has the percentage of primary THAs performed with uncemented fixation changed since 2010? (2) Has the percentage of primary THAs performed in patients older than 75 years performed with uncemented fixation changed since 2010? (3) After stratifying by age, which fixation strategy (cemented versus uncemented and hybrid versus uncemented) is associated with the lowest risk of revision? METHODS: National annual reports from hip arthroplasty registers were identified, and data were extracted from registers published in English or a Scandinavian language, with at least 3 years of reported data in the period from 2010 to 2017. These included Australia, Denmark, England-Wales, Finland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Romania, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, which are all countries with high completeness rates. Data regarding rates of revisions (all causes) related to fixation methods and secondary to different age groups, were taken directly from the registers and no re-analysis was done. The risk estimates were presented as either hazard ratios, rate per 100 component years or as Kaplan-Meier estimates of revision. The age groups compared for Denmark were younger than 50, 50-59, 60-69,70-79, and older than 80 years, and for Australia, New Zealand, England-Wales, and Finland, they were younger than 55, 55-64, 65-74, and older than 75 years. No data were pooled across the registers. RESULTS: The current use of uncemented fixation in primary THAs varies between 24% (Sweden) and 71% (Denmark). Increasing use of uncemented fixation has been reported in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, whereas decreasing use of uncemented fixation has been reported in England-Wales, Australia, New Zealand, and Finland. Examining the group of patients older than 75 years, we found that the use of uncemented fixation has been stable in Netherlands, Sweden, New Zealand, and England-Wales. The use of uncemented fixation is still increasing in Denmark and Australia. In Finland, the use of uncemented fixation has decreased (from 43 % to 24 %) from 2010 to 2017. When compared with uncemented fixation, the risk of revision for hips using cemented fixation was lower in patients older than 75 years for all registers surveyed, except for the oldest males in the Finnish register. In this group, no difference was found between cemented and uncemented fixation. CONCLUSION: Our findings should be used in healthcare policy as feedback on current THAs being performed so as to direct surgeons to choose the right implant fixation, especially in patients older than 75 years, thereby reducing revision risk and increasing the long-term survival of primary THAs. It appears that femoral stem fixation may be the most important revision risk factor in older patients, and future studies should examine this perspective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Lumboperitoneal and Ventriculoperitoneal Shunting for Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Demonstrate Comparable Failure and Complication Rates.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic intracranial hypertension results in increased intracranial pressure leading to headache and visual loss. This disease frequently requires surgical intervention through lumboperitoneal (LP) or ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunting. OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative outcomes between LP and VP shunts, including failure and complication rates. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using a national administrative database (MarketScan) to identify idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) patients who underwent LP or VP shunting from 2007 to 2014. Multivariate logistic and Cox regressions were performed to compare rates of shunt failure and time to shunt failure between LP and VP shunts while controlling for demographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: The analytic cohort included 1082 IIH patients, 347 of whom underwent LP shunt placement at index hospitalization and 735 of whom underwent VP shunt placement. Rates of shunt failure were similar among patients with LP and VP shunt (34.6% vs 31.7%; P = .382). Among patients who experienced shunt failure, the mean number of shunt failures was 2.1 ± 1.6 and was similar between LP and VP cohorts. Ninety-day readmission rates, complication rates, and costs did not differ significantly between LP and VP shunts. Patients who experienced more than two shunt failures tended to have an earlier time to first shunt failure (hazard ratio 1.41; 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.85; P = .013). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that LP and VP shunts may have comparable rates of shunt failure and complication. Regardless of shunt type, earlier time to first shunt failure may be associated with multiple shunt failures.

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator in 2019 and beyond.

The completely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) is rapidly evolving to become a complete alternative for the transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) leaving the heart and vasculature untouched. Newer trials and registries in cohorts that are similar to real-world ICD patient populations confirm the initial data on safety and efficacy. Technical improvements have resulted in reduced inappropriate shock rates, although more data are warranted, and new developments such as substernal lead positioning, communication between the S-ICD and a leadless cardiac pacemaker and remote monitoring options have evolved to overcome the shortcomings of S-ICD therapy. With these continuing developments, it is expected that within the next years the S-ICD will continue to evolve to a treatment option for ventricular arrhythmia as effective as the TV-ICD overcoming the shortcomings of transvenous leads as well as the drawbacks of the initial system, providing effective shock therapy, pacing capabilities, low complication and inappropriate therapy rates, and automated remote monitoring.

No difference in failure rates or clinical outcomes between non-stemmed constrained condylar prostheses and posterior-stabilized prostheses for primary total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: There has been an increase in the use of unlinked constrained condylar knee (CCK) prostheses in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for cases with significant deformities that cannot be adequately balanced in flexion and extension. However, the literature on its outcomes is limited. The goal of this study is to evaluate whether there are any clinic or radiographic outcome differences for a primary, non-stemmed, unlinked constrained TKA as compared to a control group of posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA using the same implant design. METHODS: Clinical and radiographic outcome measures for 404 cemented, non-stemmed, primary TKAs performed by two surgeons at the same institution were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent primary, non-stemmed components; 241 used CCK inserts and 163 used PS inserts. Preoperative deformity, knee society scores (KSS), range-of-motion (ROM), radiographic data and revision rates were compared between the CCK and PS groups. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable demographics and preoperative ROM and KSS. At similar mean follow-up times (6.1 ± 1.0 years for the CCK group and 6.3 ± 1.2 years for the PS group), no significant difference was found in ROM, KSS or radiographic outcomes. Revision rates were higher for the CCK group (2%) as compared to the HF-PS (0.6%) group (n.s). CONCLUSIONS: The particular design of cemented, primary, non-stemmed, unlinked CCK-TKA examined in this study provided similar clinical and radiographic outcomes to that of PS-TKA at midterm follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Treatment of failed aortic bioprostheses: An evaluation of conventional redo surgery and transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: The use of bioprostheses for surgical aortic valve replacement increased substantially within the last years. In case of prosthesis failure, re-SAVR is standard of care, whereas valve-in-valve deployment of a transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve prosthesis (VinV-TFAVI) has recently emerged as an alternative. We sought to evaluate early safety, clinical efficacy, and all-cause 1-year-mortality of VinV-TFAVI and redo surgery for failing aortic bioprostheses (re-SAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients receiving either VinV-TFAVI (n = 147) or re-SAVR (n = 111) for a degenerated aortic bioprosthesis between 01/2006 and 05/2017 were included in this analysis. All-cause 1-year mortality was the primary outcome measure. Early safety and clinical efficacy according to VARC-2 endpoint definitions were evaluated at 30 days. Baseline characteristics differed significantly between both groups including age, STS-PROM, and incidence of relevant comorbidities. Re-stenosis was the predominant mode of failure in 45.9% of re-SAVR and 63.1% of VinV-TFAVI patients. The rate of "early safety" endpoints was lower with VinV-TFAVI (17.7% vs. 64.9%, p < 0.01), the rate of "clinical efficacy" endpoints was lower, e.g. better with re-SAVR (53.1% vs. 32.4%, p < 0.01). All-cause 1-year-mortality (VinV-TFAVI 8.8% vs re-SAVR 9.9%, p = 0.84) was not different. Treatment strategy was not associated with 1-year-mortality in a Cox regression analysis. The incidence of prosthesis-patient-mismatch was higher in VinV-TFAVI compared to re-SAVR. CONCLUSION: VinV-TFAVI represents a viable alternative for treatment of degenerated aortic bioprostheses in patients at increased surgical risk. However, in patients at low risk for reoperation, a better clinical efficacy and acceptable safety may favour re-SAVR.

Prognosis of Hardware-Related Problems in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cage and Plate Constructs.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze hardware-related problems and their prognoses after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using cages and plates for degenerative and traumatic cervical disc diseases. METHODS: The study included 808 patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for degenerative and traumatic disc diseases with >1 year of follow-up. We investigated time of onset and progression of problems associated with instrumentation and cage usage. The mean follow-up time was 3.4 years. Type of plate, range and level of fusion, patient factors (age, sex, body mass index, and bone mineral density), and local kyphosis were evaluated. RESULTS: Complications were found in 132 cases (16.5%), including subsidence in 69 cases, plate loosening in 8 cases, screw loosening in 8 cases, screw breakage in 1 case, and multiple complications in 36 cases. In 3 cases, additional posterior cervical surgery was performed. One case needed hardware revision. There were no esophageal, tracheal, or neurovascular structural injuries secondary to metal failure. There were no significant differences in type of plate, level of surgery, or patient factors. The greater the number of fusion segments, the greater the incidence of complications (P = 0.001). The clinical outcomes improved regardless of the complications (P = 0.083). CONCLUSIONS: Most hardware-related complications are not symptomatic and can be treated conservatively. Only a few cases need revision surgery. Precise surgical techniques are needed in multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (>3 levels) because of the increased complication rate.