Total Knee Arthroplasty in the Post-Traumatic Knee: Revision Risks and Functional Outcomes Compared to Osteoarthritic Knees. A Report of Primary Procedures From the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for post-traumatic arthritis (PTA) poses higher challenges and increased risks of complications compared to TKA for osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to compare implant survivorships, reasons for revision, and patient-reported outcome measures between OA and PTA as indications for TKA. METHODS: We selected all primary TKAs for PTA or OA between 2007 and 2020 from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (Landelijke Registratie Orthopedische Interventies). The study included 3,897 TKA procedures for PTA (median follow-up 4.6 years; interquartile range: 2.2, 7.3) and 255,259 procedures for OA (median follow-up 4.7 years; interquartile range 2.2, 7.6). A total of 10,480 revision procedures were performed across both groups (238 in PTA knees; 10,242 in OA knees). We analyzed the prevalence of preoperative comorbidities and postoperative complications, as well as the reasons for revision, and calculated the implant survival rates. RESULTS: The survival revision rate in the OA group was significantly lower at both follow-up moments (5- and 10- years). The likelihood for revision was increased in TKA for PTA compared to TKA for OA (hazards ratio: 1.16 [95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.33], P = .03). The most common reason for a revision was instability and arthrofibrosis in the PTA group compared to patellar pain for the OA group. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated an increased risk for revision for any reason in TKA for PTA compared to OA. Revision for instability and arthrofibrosis were more prevalent in the PTA group, while revision for patellar pain was less prevalent compared to TKA for OA.

Long-Term Clinical Performance of an Uncemented, Mobile Bearing, Anterior Stabilized Knee System and the Impact of Previous Knee Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to report long-term survival and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of the uncemented low contact stress total knee system and explore the potential association between prior knee surgery and outcomes. METHODS: A total of 1,289 procedures in 1,068 patients performed between 2000 and 2010 (mean follow-up 11.1 years) were retrospectively identified. All patients received an uncemented, mobile bearing, anterior stabilized (cruciate sacrificing) knee implant with a porous coating on the bone-prosthesis surface. Implant survival was calculated using competing risk analyses at 5, 10, and 15 years. PROMs include the Oxford Knee Score, Knee Society Score (domain function), EuroQol 5D-3L, and Numeric Rating Scale for pain during rest and activity, and for overall satisfaction. The association between previous surgery (no surgery versus meniscectomy versus arthroscopy versus corrective osteotomies) and implant survival was assessed with multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis; the association with PROMs was assessed with multivariable linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Survival after 5, 10, and 15 years was 97.0% (95% CI 96.0-98.0), 96.3% (95% CI 95.3-97.3), and 96.0% (95% CI 94.8-97.2), respectively. The most common reason for revision was aseptic loosening of the tibial tray (23/49 revisions, 47%). All PROMs were comparable with the reference values of the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. History of knee surgery prior to TKA was not associated with survival or PROMs. CONCLUSION: The low contact stress uncemented mobile bearing knee implant provides excellent survival and patient satisfaction in our cohort. Previous surgery does not seem to compromise results in our population.

Smell - Adding a New Dimension to Urinalysis.

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infections (UTI) are among the most common infections in children. The primary tool to detect UTI is dipstick urinalysis; however, this has limited sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, urine culture has to be performed to confirm a UTI. Urinary volatile organic compounds (VOC) may serve as potential biomarker for diagnosing UTI. Previous studies on urinary VOCs focused on detection of UTI in a general population; therefore, this proof-of-principle study was set up in a clinical high-risk pediatric population. METHODS: This study was performed at a tertiary nephro-urological clinic. Patients included were 0-18 years, clinically suspected of a UTI, and had abnormal urinalysis. Urine samples were divided into four groups, i.e., urine without bacterial growth, contamination, colonization, and UTI. VOC analysis was performed using an electronic nose (eNose) (Cyranose 320®) and VOC profiles of subgroups were compared. RESULTS: Urinary VOC analysis discriminated between UTI and non-UTI samples (AUC 0.70; p = 0.048; sensitivity 0.67, specificity 0.70). The diagnostic accuracy of VOCs improved when comparing urine without bacterial growth versus with UTI (AUC 0.80; p = 0.009, sensitivity 0.79, specificity 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: In an intention-to-diagnose high-risk pediatric population, UTI could be discriminated from non-UTI by VOC profiling, using an eNose. Since eNose can be used as bed-side test, these results suggest that urinary VOC analysis may serve as an adjuvant in the diagnostic work-up of UTI in children.