International Delphi Study on Wound Closure and Incision Management in Joint Arthroplasty Part 2: Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This modified Delphi study aimed to develop a consensus on optimal wound closure and incision management strategies for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Given the critical nature of wound care and incision management in influencing patient outcomes, this study sought to synthesize evidence-based best practices for wound care in THA procedures. METHODS: An international panel of 20 orthopedic surgeons from Europe, Canada, and the United States evaluated a targeted literature review of 18 statements (14 specific to THA and 4 related to both THA and total knee arthroplasty). There were 3 rounds of anonymous voting per topic using a modified 5-point Likert scale with a predetermined consensus threshold of ≥ 75% agreement necessary for a statement to be accepted. RESULTS: After 3 rounds of voting, consensus was achieved for all 18 statements. Notable recommendations for THA wound management included (1) the use of barbed sutures over non-barbed sutures (shorter closing times and overall cost savings); (2) the use of subcuticular sutures over skin staples (lower risk of superficial infections and higher patient preferences, but longer closing times); (3) the use of mesh-adhesives over silver-impregnated dressings (lower rate of wound complications); (4) for at-risk patients, the use of negative pressure wound therapy over other dressings (lower wound complications and reoperations, as well as fewer dressing changes); and (5) the use of triclosan-coated sutures (lower risk of surgical site infection) over standard sutures. CONCLUSIONS: Through a structured modified Delphi approach, a panel of 20 orthopedic surgeons reached consensus on all 18 statements pertaining to wound closure and incision management in THA. This study provides a foundational framework for establishing evidence-based best practices, aiming to reduce variability in patient outcomes and to enhance the overall quality of care in THA procedures.

International Delphi Study on Wound Closure and Dressing Management in Joint Arthroplasty: Part 1: Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this modified Delphi study was to obtain consensus on wound closure and dressing management in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: The Delphi panel included 20 orthopaedic surgeons from Europe and North America. There were 26 statements identified using a targeted literature review. Consensus was developed for the statements with up to three rounds of anonymous voting per topic. Panelists ranked their agreement with each statement on a five-point Likert scale. An a priori threshold of ≥ 75% was required for consensus. RESULTS: All 26 statements achieved consensus after three rounds of anonymous voting. Wound closure-related interventions that were recommended for use in TKA included: 1) closing in semi-flexion versus extension (superior range of motion); 2) using aspirin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis over other agents (reduces wound complications); 3) barbed sutures over non-barbed sutures (lower wound complications, better cosmetic appearances, shorter closing times, and overall cost savings); 4) mesh-adhesives over other skin closure methods (lower wound complications, higher patient satisfaction scores, lower rates of readmission); 5) silver-impregnated dressings over standard dressings (lower wound complications, decreased infections, fewer dressing changes); 6) in high-risk patients, negative pressure wound therapy over other dressings (lower wound complications, decreased reoperations, fewer dressing changes); and 7) using triclosan-coated over non-antimicrobial-coated sutures (lower risks of surgical site infection). CONCLUSIONS: Using a modified Delphi approach, the panel achieved consensus on 26 statements pertaining to wound closure and dressing management in TKA. This study forms the basis for identifying critical evidence supported by clinical practice for wound management to help reduce variability, advance standardization, and ultimately improve outcomes during TKA. The results presented here can serve as the foundation for knowledge, education, and improved clinical outcomes for surgeons performing TKAs.

Experience-based health state valuation using the EQ VAS: a register-based study of the EQ-5D-3L among nine patient groups in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: The EQ VAS component of the EQ-5D questionnaire has been used to assess patients' valuation of their own health besides its use for self-reporting of overall health status. The objective of the present study was to identify patients' valuation of EQ-5D-3L health states using the EQ VAS in different patient groups over time and in comparison to the general population. METHODS: Data were obtained from patients from nine National Quality Registers (n = 172,070 patients) at baseline and at 1-year follow-up and compared with data from the general population (n = 41,761 participants). The correlation between EQ VAS scores and EQ-5D-3L index based on the Swedish experience-based VAS value set was assessed. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models were used to determine the association between EQ-5D-3L dimensions and EQ VAS valuation. RESULTS: EQ VAS scores showed consistency with severity of health states both at baseline and at 1-year follow-up in the nine selected EQ-5D-3L health states. The regression models showed mostly consistent decrements by severity levels in each dimension at both time points and similar to the general population. The dimension mainly associated with inconsistency was the self-care severity level three. Problems in the anxiety/depression dimension had the largest impact on overall health status in most of the patient groups and the general population. CONCLUSION: The study has demonstrated the important role EQ VAS can play in revealing patients' valuation of their health and showed the variation in valuation of EQ-5D-3L dimensions and levels of severity across different patient groups.

What is the Role of Stem Size and Offset in the Risk of Nonseptic Revision of the Exeter® 150-mm Stem? A Study From the Swedish Arthroplasty Register.

BACKGROUND: The Exeter® stem is used worldwide, often in older patients, and it is the second most commonly used cemented stem design in Sweden. Previous studies have shown that for cemented stems with a composite beam, the smallest sizes result in an increased risk of revision for mechanical failure. However, little is known about whether the survivorship of the polished Exeter stem, which generally has been shown to be good, might be associated with design parameters such as stem dimensions or offset at extreme implant sizes. QUESTION/PURPOSE: Are differences in (1) stem size or (2) offset of the standard Exeter V40 150-mm stem associated with differences in the risk of stem revision for aseptic loosening? METHODS: Between 2001 and 2020, 47,161 Exeter stems were reported to the Swedish Arthroplasty Register, with very high coverage and completeness documented during the period studied. In this cohort, we included patients with primary osteoarthritis who underwent surgery with a standard Exeter stem length of 150 mm and V40 cone with any type of cemented cups that had had at least 1000 reported insertions. This selection resulted in a study cohort representing 79% (37,619 of 47,161) of the total number of Exeter stems in the registry during that time. The primary study outcome was stem revision for aseptic indications such as loosening, periprosthetic fracture, dislocation, and implant fracture. A Cox regression was performed, with adjustment for age, gender, surgical approach, year of surgery, use of highly crosslinked polyethylene cups, and femoral head size and length dictated by the shape of the head trunnion. Adjusted hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence intervals. Two separate analyses were performed. The first analysis excluded stems with the highest offsets (50 mm and 56 mm, which were not available for stem size 0). The second analysis excluded stem size 0 to include all offsets. Because stem survival was not proportional over time, we divided the analyses into two insertion periods, 0 to 8 years and beyond 8 years. RESULTS: Stem size 0 (compared to size 1) was associated with an increased risk of revision up to 8 years when all stem sizes were included (first analysis 0 to 8 years, HR 1.7 [95% CI 1.2 to 2.3]; p = 0.002). Forty-four percent (63 of 144) of revisions of size 0 stems were for periprosthetic fracture. There was no consistent association between stem size and risk of aseptic stem revision when size 0 was excluded in the second analysis beyond 8 years. The most common offset (44 mm) was associated with an increased risk of revision (compared with 37.5 mm) up to 8 years when all sizes were included (first analysis, HR 1.6 [95% CI 1.1 to 2.1]; p = 0.01). In the second analysis (beyond 8 years, all offsets included), offset of 44 mm was compared with offset of 37.5 mm; compared with the first period, this offset was associated with a reduced risk (HR 0.6 [95% CI 0.4 to 0.9]; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: We found overall high survival of the Exeter stem, with generally little or no influence of stem variations on the risk of aseptic revision. However, stem size 0 was associated with an increased risk of revision mainly for periprosthetic fractures. If the femoral anatomy offers a choice between sizes 0 and 1 in patients with poor bone quality who are at risk of periprosthetic fracture, our data speak in favor of choosing the larger stem if the surgeon believes it is safe to insert the larger size, or, if available, another stem design that has a documented lower risk of this complication. For patients with good cortical bone quality but very narrow canals, a cementless stem may also be a good alternative. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

What Factors Identified in Initial Osteoarthritis Management Are Associated With Poor Patient-reported Outcomes After THA? A Register-based Study.

BACKGROUND: Some patients report long-term pain or no improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) or are dissatisfied after THA. However, factors associated with these poorer patient-reported outcomes after surgery are inconsistent and have typically been studied in the late phase of hip osteoarthritis (OA) among patients already eligible for surgery. Earlier identification of risk factors would provide time to address modifiable factors, helping to improve patients' pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction after surgery and reduce the burden on orthopaedic clinics by referring patients who are better prepared for surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We analyzed data from patients with hip OA referred to a first-line OA intervention program in primary healthcare at a stage when they had not been referred for THA, and asked: (1) What percentage of patients who proceed to THA report lack of improvement in pain, lack of improvement in HRQoL as measured by the EQ-5D, or are not satisfied with surgery 1 year after THA? (2) What associations exist between baseline factors at referral to this first-line OA intervention program and these poorer patient-reported outcomes 1 year after THA? METHODS: We included 3411 patients with hip OA (mean age 67 ± 9 years, 63% [2160 of 3411] women) who had been referred for first-line OA interventions between 2008 and 2015 and subsequently underwent THA for OA. All patients were initially identified through the Swedish Osteoarthritis Register, which follows and evaluates patients in a standardized national first-line OA intervention program. Then, we identified those who were also registered in the Swedish Arthroplasty Register with a THA during the study period. We included only those with complete patient-reported outcome measures for pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively, representing 78% (3411 of 4368) of patients, who had the same baseline characteristics as nonrespondents. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the associations between 14 baseline factors and the aforementioned patient-reported outcomes of pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction 1 year after THA, adjusted for all included factors. RESULTS: Five percent (156 of 3411) of the study population lacked improvement in pain, 11% (385 of 3411) reported no improvement in HRQoL, and 10% (339 of 3411) reported they were not satisfied with surgery 1 year after THA. Charnley Class C (multiple-joint OA or another condition that affects the ability to walk) was associated with all outcomes: lack of improvement in pain (OR 1.84 [95% CI 1.24 to 2.71]; p = 0.002), lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR 1.83 [95% CI 1.42 to 2.36]; p < 0.001), and not being satisfied (OR 1.40 [95% CI 1.07 to 1.82]; p = 0.01). Older age was associated with a lack of improvement in pain (OR per year 1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.05]; p = 0.02), lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR per year 1.04 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.06]; p < 0.001), and not being satisfied (OR per year 1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.05]; p < 0.001). Depression was associated with a lack of improvement in pain (OR 1.54 [95% CI 1.00 to 2.35]; p = 0.050) and with not being satisfied (OR 1.50 [95% CI 1.11 to 2.04]; p = 0.01) but not with a lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.76 to 1.43]; p = 0.79). Having four or more comorbidities was associated with a lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR 2.08 [95% CI 1.39 to 3.10]; p < 0.001) but not with a lack of improvement in pain and not being satisfied. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that older age, Charley Class C, and depression in patients with first-line OA interventions were risk factors associated with poorer outcomes regarding pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction after THA. Screening patients with hip OA for depression early in the disease course would provide increased time to optimize treatments and may contribute to better patient-reported pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction after future THA. Further research should focus on identifying the optimal time for surgery in patients with depression, as well as what targeted interventions for depression can improve outcome of surgery in these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Outcome of patients with osteoarthritis aged 90 to 101 years after cemented total hip arthroplasty: 1,385 patients from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Few studies have focused on nonagenarians treated with total hip arthroplasty (THA). We investigated 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), reoperation rate, risk factors for reoperation, and relative patient survival in nonagenarians or older. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 167,091 patients with primary cemented THA performed for osteoarthritis between 1992 and 2019 were identified in the Swedish Arthroplasty Register. Patients were divided into age groups based on age at time of surgery: 60-74 (n = 90,285), 75-89 (n = 75,421), and > 90 years (n = 1,385). Mortality rate, PROMs (pain-Likert scale, satisfaction-Likert scale, EQ-VAS, n = 67,553), reoperation rate, risk factors for reoperation, and relative patient survival were studied. RESULTS: The nonagenarians had the highest postoperative mortality rate, 1.7% and 2.6% at 30 and 90 days, respectively. Nonagenarian females reported significantly lower pre- and postoperative EQ-VAS compared with patients aged 60-89 years but reported least pain and highest patient satisfaction 1 year after surgery. At 2 years the nonagenarians had highest reoperation frequency-2.7%-due to infection (1.5%), dislocation (0.8%), and periprosthetic fracture (0.4%). Increasing age, male sex, and polished stem were associated with higher risk of reoperation within 2 years. 8-year age- and sex-matched relative survival was highest among nonagenarians (study group/matched population: ≥ 90 years 3.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.0-3.8; 75-89 years: 1.4, CI 1.4-1.4, and 60-74 years: 1.1, CI 1.1-1.1). CONCLUSION: 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality and reoperation rates were higher in nonagenarians but PROM data showed least pain and highest patient satisfaction 1 year after surgery with THA among female nonagenarians with primary osteoarthritis.

Increasing risk of revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty: results from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The incidence of periprosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA) may be increasing. We performed time-trend analyses of risk, rates, and timing of revision due to infection after primary THAs in the Nordic countries from the period 2004-2018. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 569,463 primary THAs reported to the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association from 2004 to 2018 were studied. Absolute risk estimates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier and cumulative incidence function methods, whereas adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) were assessed by Cox regression with the first revision due to infection after primary THA as primary endpoint. In addition, we explored changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection. RESULTS: 5,653 (1.0%) primary THAs were revised due to infection during a median follow-up time of 5.4 (IQR 2.5-8.9) years after surgery. Compared with the period 2004-2008, the aHRs for revision were 1.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-1.5) for 2009-2013, and 1.9 (CI 1.7-2.0) for 2014-2018. The absolute 5-year rates of revision due to infection were 0.7% (CI 0.7-0.7), 1.0% (CI 0.9-1.0), and 1.2% (CI 1.2-1.3) for the 3 time periods respectively. We found changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection. Compared with 2004-2008, the aHR for revision within 30 days after THA was 2.5 (CI 2.1-2.9) for 2009-2013, and 3.4 (CI 3.0-3.9) for 2013-2018. The aHR for revision within 31-90 days after THA was 1.5 (CI 1.3-1.9) for 2009-2013, and 2.5 (CI 2.1-3.0) for 2013-2018, compared with 2004-2008. CONCLUSION: The risk of revision due to infection after primary THA almost doubled, both in absolute cumulative incidence and in relative risk, throughout the period 2004-2018. This increase was mainly due to an increased risk of revision within 90 days of THA. This may reflect a "true" increase (i.e., frailer patients or more use of uncemented implants) and/or an "apparent" increase (i.e., improved diagnostics, changed revision strategy, or completeness of reporting) in incidence of periprosthetic joint infection. It is not possible to disclose such changes in the present study, and this warrants further research.

Does choice of bearings influence the survival of cementless total hip arthroplasty in patients aged 20-55 years? Comparison of 21,594 patients reported to the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association dataset 2005-2017.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The bearings with the best survivorship for young patients with total hip arthroplasty (THA) should be identified. We compared hazard ratios (HR) of revision of primary stemmed cementless THAs with metal-on-metal (MoM), ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), and ceramic-on-highly-crosslinked-polyethylene (CoXLP) with that of metal-on-highly-crosslinked-polyethylene (MoXLP) bearings in patients aged 20-55 years with primary osteoarthritis or childhood hip disorders. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association dataset we included 1,813 MoM, 3,615 CoC, 5,947 CoXLP, and 10,219 MoXLP THA in patients operated on between 2005 and 2017 in a prospective cohort study. We used the Kaplan-Meier estimator for THA survivorship and Cox regression to estimate HR of revision adjusted for confounders (including 95% confidence intervals [CI]). MoXLP was used as reference. HRs were calculated during 3 intervals (0-2, 2-7, and 7-13 years) to meet the assumption of proportional hazards. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 5 years for MoXLP, 10 years for MoM, 6 years for CoC, and 4 years for CoXLP. 13-year Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were 95% (CI 94-95) for MoXLP, 82% (CI 80-84) for MoM, 93% (CI 92-95) for CoC, and 93% (CI 92-94) for CoXLP bearings. MoM had higher 2-7 and 7-13 years' adjusted HRs of revision (3.6, CI 2.3-5.7 and 4.1, CI 1.7-10). MoXLP, CoC, and CoXLP had similar HRs in all 3 periods. The 7-13-year adjusted HRs of revision of CoC and CoXLP were statistically non-significantly higher. CONCLUSION: In young patients, MoXLP for primary cementless THA had higher revision-free survival and lower HR for revision than MoM bearings. Longer follow-up is needed to compare MoXLP, CoC, and CoXLP.

The use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and systemic antibiotic prophylactic use in 2,971,357 primary total knee arthroplasties from 2010 to 2020: an international register-based observational study among countries in Africa, Europe, North America, and Oceania.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) and systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) have been used to reduce periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. We investigated the use of ALBC and SAP in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational study is based on 2,971,357 primary TKAs reported in 2010-2020 to national/regional joint arthroplasty registries in Australia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. Aggregate-level data on trends and types of bone cement, antibiotic agents, and doses and duration of SAP used was extracted from participating registries. RESULTS: ALBC was used in 77% of the TKAs with variation ranging from 100% in Norway to 31% in the USA. Palacos R+G was the most common (62%) ALBC type used. The primary antibiotic used in ALBC was gentamicin (94%). Use of ALBC in combination with SAP was common practice (77%). Cefazolin was the most common (32%) SAP agent. The doses and duration of SAP used varied from one single preoperative dosage as standard practice in Bolzano, Italy (98%) to 1-day 4 doses in Norway (83% of the 40,709 TKAs reported to the Norwegian arthroplasty register). CONCLUSION: The proportion of ALBC usage in primary TKA varies internationally, with gentamicin being the most common antibiotic. ALBC in combination with SAP was common practice, with cefazolin the most common SAP agent. The type of ALBC and type, dose, and duration of SAP varied among participating countries.

Knowledge support for ankle fractures in the Swedish Fracture Register - a qualitative study of physicians' experiences.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the experiences of physicians presented with a knowledge support system while registering data on ankle fractures in the Swedish Fracture Register. The present study aims to answer the following research questions:     â€¢ "How is receiving knowledge support while registering a fracture in the Swedish Fracture Register experienced by the physicians using it?".     â€¢ "Can a feeling of increased usability of a quality register be achieved by providing the user with real-time feedback?". METHODS: A total of 20 physicians using the Swedish Fracture Register were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. Qualitative content analysis was performed on individual semi-structured interviews performed in May and June 2020. RESULTS: The present study demonstrates that the knowledge support system in the Swedish Fracture Register was perceived by the physicians as strengthening the evidence base and improving the quality of ankle fracture treatment. The knowledge support system was evaluated as a good tool for validating clinical decisions and managing the information that needs to be processed to make informed decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The present study affirms that being provided with knowledge support is appreciated by physicians, increase value for work and enhance the initiative to register. The physicians experienced that the knowledge support provided an appreciated validation of the clinical decisions taken and a feeling of improved care. When incorporating knowledge support into an NQR, consideration must be given to physicians' fears of becoming overly reliant on a template and losing control of the clinical base.

Do Dual-mobility Cups Reduce Revision Risk in Femoral Neck Fractures Compared With Conventional THA Designs? An International Meta-analysis of Arthroplasty Registries.

BACKGROUND: Dual-mobility cups in THA were designed to reduce prosthesis instability and the subsequent risk of revision surgery in high-risk patients, such as those with hip fractures. However, there are limited data from clinical studies reporting a revision benefit of dual-mobility over conventional THA. Collaboration between anthroplasty registries provides an opportunity to describe international practice variation and compare between-country, all-cause revision rates for dual-mobility and conventional THA. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We summarized observational data from multiple arthroplasty registries for patients receiving either a dual-mobility or conventional THA to ask: (1) Is dual-mobility use associated with a difference in risk of all-cause revision surgery compared with conventional THA? (2) Are there specific patient characteristics associated with dual-mobility use in the hip fracture population? (3) Has the use of dual-mobility constructs changed over time in patients receiving a THA for hip fracture? METHODS: Six member registries of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (from Australia, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States) provided custom aggregate data reports stratified by acetabular cup type (dual-mobility or conventional THA) in primary THA for hip fracture between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2019; surgical approach; and patient demographic data (sex, mean age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and BMI). The cumulative percent revision and mortality were calculated for each registry. To determine a global hazard ratio of all-cause revision for dual-mobility compared with conventional THA designs, we used a pseudoindividual patient data approach to pool Kaplan-Meier prosthesis revision data from each registry and perform a meta-analysis. The pseudoindividual patient data approach is a validated technique for meta-analysis of aggregate time-to-event survival data, such as revision surgery, from multiple sources. Data were available for 15,024 dual-mobility THAs and 97,200 conventional THAs performed for hip fractures during the study period. RESULTS: After pooling of complete Kaplan-Meier survival data from all six registries, the cumulative percent revision for conventional THA was 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.2% to 4.5%) and 4.7% (95% CI 4.3% to 5.3%) for dual-mobility THA at 5 years. We did not demonstrate a lower risk of all-cause revision for patients receiving dual-mobility over conventional THA designs for hip fracture in the meta-analysis once between-registry differences were adjusted for (HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.86 to 1.06]). A lower proportion of dual-mobility procedures were revised for dislocation than conventional THAs (0.9% versus 1.4%) but a higher proportion were revised for infection (1.2% versus 0.8%). In most registries, a greater proportion of dual-mobility THA patients were older, had more comorbidities, and underwent a posterior approach compared with conventional THA (p < 0.001). The proportion of dual-mobility THA used to treat hip fractures increased in each registry over time and constituted 21% (2438 of 11,874) of all THA procedures in 2019. CONCLUSION: The proportion of dual-mobility THAs in patients with hip fractures increased over time, but there was large variation in use across countries represented here. Dual-mobility cups were not associated with a reduction in the overall risk of revision surgery in patients with hip fractures. A randomized controlled trial powered to detect the incidence of dislocation and subsequent revision surgery is required to clarify the efficacy of dual-mobility cups to treat hip fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

How do Patient-reported Outcome Scores in International Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Registries Compare?

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the only systematic approach through which the patient's perspective can be considered by surgeons (in determining a procedure's efficacy or appropriateness) or healthcare systems (in the context of value-based healthcare). PROMs in registries enable international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after total joint arthroplasty, but the extent to which those scores may vary between different registry populations has not been clearly defined. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) To what degree do mean change in general and joint-specific PROM scores vary across arthroplasty registries, and to what degree is the proportion of missing PROM scores in an individual registry associated with differences in the mean reported change scores? (2) Do PROM scores vary with patient BMI across registries? (3) Are comorbidity levels comparable across registries, and are they associated with differences in PROM scores? METHODS: Thirteen national, regional, or institutional registries from nine countries reported aggregate PROM scores for patients who had completed PROMs preoperatively and 6 and/or 12 months postoperatively. The requested aggregate PROM scores were the EuroQol-5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D) index values, on which score 1 reflects "full health" and 0 reflects "as bad as death." Joint-specific PROMs were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), with total scores ranging from 0 to 48 (worst-best), and the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (KOOS-PS) values, scored 0 to 100 (worst-best). Eligible patients underwent primary unilateral THA or TKA for osteoarthritis between 2016 and 2019. Registries were asked to exclude patients with subsequent revisions within their PROM collection period. Raw aggregated PROM scores and scores adjusted for age, gender, and baseline values were inspected descriptively. Across all registries and PROMs, the reported percentage of missing PROM data varied from 9% (119 of 1354) to 97% (5305 of 5445). We therefore graphically explored whether PROM scores were associated with the level of data completeness. For each PROM cohort, chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (men versus women; age 20 to 64 years, 65 to 74 years, and older than 75 years; and high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were evaluated descriptively by comparing proportions with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification of 3 or higher across registries for each PROM cohort. RESULTS: The mean improvement in EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.16 to 0.33 for hip registries and 0.12 to 0.25 for knee registries. The mean improvement in the OHS (seven registries) ranged from 18 to 24, and for the HOOS-PS (three registries) it ranged from 29 to 35. The mean improvement in the OKS (six registries) ranged from 15 to 20, and for the KOOS-PS (four registries) it ranged from 19 to 23. For all PROMs, variation was smaller when adjusting the scores for differences in age, gender, and baseline values. After we compared the registries, there did not seem to be any association between the level of missing PROM data and the mean change in PROM scores. The proportions of patients with BMI 30 kg/m 2 or higher ranged from 16% to 43% (11 hip registries) and from 35% to 62% (10 knee registries). Distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed across hip and knee registries. Further, for all PROMs, distributions also differed across 12 predefined PROM strata. For the EQ-5D, patients in the younger age groups (20 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years) had higher proportions of BMI measurements greater than 30 kg/m 2 than older patients, and patients with the lowest baseline scores had higher proportions of BMI measurements more than 30 kg/m 2 compared with patients with higher baseline scores. These associations were similar for the OHS and OKS cohorts. The proportions of patients with ASA Class at least 3 ranged across registries from 6% to 35% (eight hip registries) and from 9% to 42% (nine knee registries). CONCLUSION: Improvements in PROM scores varied among international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, gender, and preoperative scores. Higher BMI tended to be associated with lower preoperative PROM scores across registries. Large variation in BMI and comorbidity distributions across registries suggest that future international studies should consider the effect of adjusting for these factors. Although we were not able to evaluate its effect specifically, missing PROM data is a recurring challenge for registries. Demonstrating generalizability of results and evaluating the degree of response bias is crucial in using registry-based PROMs data to evaluate differences in outcome. Comparability between registries in terms of specific PROMs collection, postoperative timepoints, and demographic factors to enable confounder adjustment is necessary to use comparison between registries to inform and improve arthroplasty care internationally. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Risk factors for reoperation due to periprosthetic joint infection after elective total hip arthroplasty: a study of 35,056 patients using linked data of the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registry (SHAR) and Swedish Perioperative Registry (SPOR).

BACKGROUND: In Sweden, the incidence of a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after a planned Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is 1.3%, but the worldwide incidence of PJI after THA is unknown. This study explores associations between reoperation due to PJI and potential risk factors. METHODS: Primary elective THA surgery registered in both the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registry (SHAR) and the Swedish Perioperative Registry (SPOR) between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019 were included in this registry study, resulting in a total study population of 35,056 cases. The outcome variable was reoperation as the result of PJI within a year after surgery. Data were analysed using a multivariable Cox regression model. RESULTS: Reoperation due to PJI occurred in 460 cases (i.e., 1.3% of the study population). Each year of age increased the risk with 2% (HR 1.02 Cl 1.01, 1.03 P = < 0.001). Compared to men, women had significantly less risk for reoperation (HR 2.17 Cl 1.79, 2.53 P = < 0.001). For patients with obesity (BMI > 30), the risk increased considerably compared to underweight, normal weight, or overweight patients (HR 1.89 Cl 1.43, 2.51 P = < 0.001). The risk also increased by 6% for every 10 min of operative time (HR 1.06 Cl 1.02, 1.09 P = < 0.001). Patients having general anaesthesia had greater risk compared to those with spinal anaesthesia (HR 1.34 Cl 1.04, 1.73 P = 0.024). Finally, a lateral approach showed higher risk of reoperation than a posterior approach (HR 1.43 Cl 1.18, 1.73 P = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Recognition of the several risk factors identified in this study will be important for the perioperative management of patients undergoing THA.

Influence of implant variations on survival of the Lubinus SP II stem: evaluation of 76,530 hips in the Swedish Arthroplasty Register, 2000-2018.

Background and purpose - Almost all prosthetic implant brands include several variations. Most studies on implant performance investigate an implant system without sub-analysis of implant attributes. We studied the influence of design variations during the last 2 decades on implant survival of the most frequently used cemented femoral stem, the Lubinus SPII, reported to the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SHAR). Patients and methods - Between 2000 and 2018, 100,032 cemented Lubinus SP II stems had been reported to SHAR. Patients with primary osteoarthritis operated on with stem length 150 mm together with a cemented cup from the same manufacturer (n = 76,530) were included in this analysis. Primary study outcome was non-infectious stem revision. Cox regression with adjustment for age, sex, surgical approach, and year of surgery was used. Hazard rates (HR) are presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results - Average follow-up was 7.6 years (SD 4.2). At 18 years the overall stem survival was 99.1 (CI 98.9-99.3). Increased revision rate was observed for stems with extra offset, when a long or an extra-long head length had been used. Smaller stem sizes, in particular the smallest stem size (01), substantially increased the rate of mechanical failure as reflected by an almost 10 times increased rate of revision compared with the standard size (2). Interpretation - In this study with larger sample size and longer follow-up than previously presented from the same register, we observed more pronounced effects of previously documented design variations. Based on our results, surgeons using the Lubinus SPII stems are advised to consider an alternative solution if a Lubinus stem size 01, Lubinus extra offset, or an extra-long head seems to be the most suitable choice at the preoperative planning.

Worse patient-reported outcomes and higher risk of reoperation and adverse events after total hip replacement in patients with opioid use in the year before surgery: a Swedish register-based study on 80,483 patients.

Background and purpose - Recent studies indicate that preoperative use of opioids could be associated with higher rates of complications and worse patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after orthopedic surgery. We investigated the prevalence of preoperative opioid use and analyzed its influence on risk of revision, adverse events (AE), and PROs in patients with total hip replacement (THR). Patients and methods - This observational study included 80,483 patients operated on in 2008-2016 with THRs due to osteoarthritis. Data was obtained from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Statistics Sweden's sociodemographic registers, the Swedish National Patient Register, and the Prescribed Drug Register. We focused on patients with ≥ 4 opioid prescriptions filled 1 year prior to THR. To control for confounding, we used propensity scores to weight subjects in our analyses. Logistic and linear regression was used for outcome variables with adjustments for sociodemographic variables and comorbidities. Results - Patients with ≥ 4 opioid prescriptions in the year before THR (n = 14,720 [18%]) had a higher risk of revision within 2 years (1.8% vs. 1.1% OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.3-1.6) and AE within 90 days (9.4% vs. 6.4% OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.2-1.3) compared with patients without opioid treatment in the preoperative period. Patients with ≥ 4 opioid prescriptions rated 5 points worse on a 0-100 scale of Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and 9 points worse on a general health (EQ) VAS 1 year postoperatively. Interpretation - Having ≥ 4 opioid prescriptions filled in the year before surgery is associated with a higher risk of revision, adverse events, and worse PROs after THR. Consequently, preoperative opioid treatment should be addressed in the clinical assessment of patients eligible for THR.

Analgesic prescriptions received by patients before commencing the BOA model of care for osteoarthritis: a Swedish national registry study with matched reference and clinical guideline benchmarking.

Background and purpose - Swedish clinical guidelines for osteoarthritis (OA) prioritize patient education, exercise, and-if necessary-weight reduction before considering adjunct pharmacological intervention. Contrariwise, we investigated the proportion and type of dispensed analgesic prescriptions in Sweden received by patients during 3 years before commencing non-pharmacological primary care interventions for OA (2008-2016) compared with the general population. Furthermore, we analyzed the proportion of analgesic prescriptions dispensed before (2008-2012) compared with after (2012-2016) guideline publication in terms of concordance with clinical guideline recommendations. Patients and methods - Patients with hip or knee OA (n = 72,069) from the Better Management of OA national quality register receiving non-pharmacological interventions in primary care between 2008 and 2016 were included (OA cohort). An age, sex, and residence matched reference cohort (n = 216,207) was formed from the Swedish Total Population Register. Based on a period 3 years prior to inclusion in the OA cohort, Swedish Prescribed Drug Register data was linked to both the OA and reference cohorts. Results - Compared with the reference cohort, a distinctly larger proportion of the OA cohort had dispensed prescriptions for most types of analgesics, increasing exponentially each year prior to commencing non-pharmacological intervention. Since guideline publication, the proportion of the OA cohort having no dispensed prescription analgesics prior to non-pharmacological primary care intervention concordantly increased by 5.0% (95% CI 4.2-5.9). Furthermore, dispensed prescriptions concordantly decreased for non-selective NSAIDs -8.6% (CI -9.6 to -7.6), weak opioids -6.8% (CI -7.7 to -5.9), glucosamine -9.5% (CI -9.8 to -8.8). and hyaluronic acid -1.6% (CI -1.8 to -1.5) but discordantly increased for strong opioids 2.8% (CI 2.1-3.4) and glucocorticoid intra-articular injection for hip OA 2.1% (CI 1.0-3.1). Interpretation - In Sweden, dispensed prescription of analgesics commonly occurred before initiating non-pharmacological primary care interventions for OA but reduced modestly after guideline publication, which prioritizes nonpharmacological before pharmacological interventions. Additional modest improvements occurred in the steppedcare prioritization of analgesic prescription types. However, future strategies are required to curb an increase of strong opioids prescription for OA and glucocorticoid intra-articular injection for hip OA.

Decrease of core 2 O-glycans on synovial lubricin in osteoarthritis reduces galectin-3 mediated crosslinking.

The synovial fluid glycoprotein lubricin (also known as proteoglycan 4) is a mucin-type O-linked glycosylated biological lubricant implicated to be involved in osteoarthritis (OA) development. Lubricin's ability to reduce friction is related to its glycosylation consisting of sialylated and unsialylated Tn-antigens and core 1 and core 2 structures. The glycans on lubricin have also been suggested to be involved in crosslinking and stabilization of the lubricating superficial layer of cartilage by mediating interaction between lubricin and galectin-3. However, with the spectrum of glycans being found on lubricin, the glycan candidates involved in this interaction were unknown. Here, we confirm that the core 2 O-linked glycans mediate this lubricin-galectin-3 interaction, shown by surface plasmon resonance data indicating that recombinant lubricin (rhPRG4) devoid of core 2 structures did not bind to recombinant galectin-3. Conversely, transfection of Chinese hamster ovary cells with the core 2 GlcNAc transferase acting on a mucin-type O-glycoprotein displayed increased galectin-3 binding. Both the level of galectin-3 and the galectin-3 interactions with synovial lubricin were found to be decreased in late-stage OA patients, coinciding with an increase in unsialylated core 1 O-glycans (T-antigens) and Tn-antigens. These data suggest a defect in crosslinking of surface-active molecules in OA and provide novel insights into OA molecular pathology.

What Are the Long-term Outcomes of Mortality, Quality of Life, and Hip Function after Prosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip? A 10-year Follow-up from Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a complication after arthroplasty that negatively affects patient health. However, prior reports have not addressed the long-term consequences of hip PJI in terms of patient mortality, quality of life, and hip function. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: At a minimum of 10 years after PJI in patients undergoing primary THA, in the context of several large, national databases in Sweden, we asked: (1) Is mortality increased for patients with PJI after THA compared with patients with a noninfected THA? (2) Does PJI of the hip have a negative influence on quality of life as measured by the Euro-QoL-5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L), ambulatory aids, residential status, and hip function as measured by the Oxford Hip Score (OHS)? (3) Which factors are associated with poor patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients with PJI after primary THA? METHODS: This study included 442 patients with a PJI after primary THA, from a previously published national study, including all patients with a THA performed from 2005 to 2008 in Sweden (n = 45,570) recruited from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registry (SHAR). Possible deep PJIs were identified in the Swedish Dispensed Drug Registry and verified by review of medical records. Mortality in patients with PJI was compared with the remaining cohort of 45,128 patients undergoing primary THA who did not have PJI. Mortality data were retrieved from the SHAR, which in turn is updated daily from the population registry. A subgroup analysis of patients who underwent primary THA in 2008 was performed to adjust for the effect of comorbidities on mortality, as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores became available in the SHAR at that time. For the PROM analysis, we identified three controls matched by age, gender, indication for surgery, and year of operation to each living PJI patient. A questionnaire including EQ-5D-5L, ambulatory aids, residential status, and OHS was collected from patients with PJI and controls at a mean of 11 years from the primary procedure. Apart from age and gender, we analyzed reoperation data (such as number of reoperations and surgical approach) and final prosthesis in situ to explore possible factors associated with poor PROM results. RESULTS: After controlling for differences in sex, age, and indication for surgery, we found the all-cause 10-year mortality higher for patients with PJI (45%) compared with patients undergoing THA without PJI (29%) (odds ratio 1.4 [95% CI 1.2 to 1.6]; p < 0.001). The questionnaire, with a minimum of 10 years of follow-up, revealed a lower EQ-5D-5L index score (0.83 versus 0.94, -0.13 [95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; p < 0.001]), greater proportion of assisted living (21% versus 12%, OR 2.0 [95% CI 1.2 to 3.3]; p = 0.01), greater need of ambulatory aids (65% versus 42%, OR 3.1 [95% 2.1 to 4.8]; p < 0.001), and a lower OHS score (36 versus 44, -5.9 [-7.7 to -4.0]; p < 0.001) for patients with PJI than for matched controls. Factors associated with lower OHS score for patients with PJI were three or more reoperations (-8.0 [95% CI -13.0 to -3.2]; p = 0.01) and a direct lateral approach used at revision surgery compared with a posterior approach (-4.3 [95% CI -7.7 to -0.9]; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In this study, we found that PJI after THA has a negative impact on mortality, long-term health-related quality of life, and hip function. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed that modifiable factors such as the number of reoperations and surgical approach are associated with poorer hip function. This emphasizes the importance of prompt, proper initial treatment to reduce repeated surgery to minimize the negative long-term effects of hip PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Collection and Reporting of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Arthroplasty Registries: Multinational Survey and Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated questionnaires that are completed by patients. Arthroplasty registries vary in PROM collection and use. Current information about registry collection and use of PROMs is important to help improve methods of PROM data analysis, reporting, comparison, and use toward improving clinical practice. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: To characterize PROM collection and use by registries, we asked: (1) What is the current practice of PROM collection by arthroplasty registries that are current or former members of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries, and are there sufficient similarities in PROM collection between registries to enable useful international comparisons that could inform the improvement of arthroplasty care? (2) How do registries differ in PROM administration and demographic, clinical, and comorbidity index variables collected for case-mix adjustment in data analysis and reporting? (3) What quality assurance methods are used for PROMs, and how are PROM results reported and used by registries? (4) What recommendations to arthroplasty registries may improve PROM reporting and facilitate international comparisons? METHODS: An electronic survey was developed with questions about registry structure and collection, analysis, reporting, and use of PROM data and distributed to directors or senior administrators of 39 arthroplasty registries that were current or former members of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries. In all, 64% (25 of 39) of registries responded and completed the survey. Missing responses from incomplete surveys were captured by contacting the registries, and up to three reminder emails were sent to nonresponding registries. Recommendations about PROM collection were drafted, revised, and approved by the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries PROMs Working Group members. RESULTS: Of the 25 registries that completed the survey, 15 collected generic PROMs, most frequently the EuroQol-5 Dimension survey; 16 collected joint-specific PROMs, most frequently the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; and 11 registries collected a satisfaction item. Most registries administered PROM questionnaires within 3 months before and 1 year after surgery. All 16 registries that collected PROM data collected patient age, sex or gender, BMI, indication for the primary arthroplasty, reason for revision arthroplasty, and a comorbidity index, most often the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. All 16 registries performed regular auditing and reporting of data quality, and most registries reported PROM results to hospitals and linked PROM data to other data sets such as hospital, medication, billing, and emergency care databases. Recommendations for transparent reporting of PROMs were grouped into four categories: demographic and clinical, survey administration, data analysis, and results. CONCLUSION: Although registries differed in PROM collection and use, there were sufficient similarities that may enable useful data comparisons. The International Society of Arthroplasty Registries PROMs Working Group recommendations identify issues that may be important to most registries such as the need to make decisions about survey times and collection methods, as well as how to select generic and joint-specific surveys, handle missing data and attrition, report data, and ensure representativeness of the sample. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: By collecting PROMs, registries can provide patient-centered data to surgeons, hospitals, and national entities to improve arthroplasty care.

Prior hip arthroscopy does not affect 1-year patient-reported outcomes following total hip arthroplasty: a register-based matched case-control study of 675 patients.

Background and purpose - Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is a common cause of hip pain and may contribute to the development of osteoarthritis. We investigated whether a prior hip arthroscopy affects the patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of a later total hip arthroplasty (THA).Patients and methods - Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 2011 and 2018 were identified from a hip arthroscopy register and linked to the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR). A propensity-score matched control group without a prior hip arthroscopy, based on demographic data and preoperative score from the EuroQoL visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) and hip pain score, was identified from SHAR. The group with a hip arthroscopy (treated group) consisted of 135 patients and the matched control group comprised 540 patients. The included PROMs were EQ-5D and EQ VAS of the EuroQoL group, and a questionnaire regarding hip pain and another addressing satisfaction. Rate of reoperation was collected from the SHAR. The follow-up period was 1 year.Results - The mean interval from arthroscopy to THA was 27 months (SD 19). The EQ-5D was 0.81 and 0.82, and EQ VAS was 78 and 79 in the treated group and the matched control group respectively. There were no differences in hip pain, and reported satisfaction was similar with 87% in the treated group and 86% in the matched control group.Interpretation - These results offer reassurance that a prior hip arthroscopy for FAIS does not appear to affect the short-term patient-reported outcomes of a future THA and indicate that patients undergoing an intervention are not at risk of inferior results due to their prior hip arthroscopy.