The experience of patients undergoing aseptic, elective revision knee joint replacement surgery: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Around 6,000 revision knee replacement procedures are performed in the United Kingdom each year. Three-quarters of procedures are for aseptic, elective reasons, such as progressive osteoarthritis, prosthesis loosening/wear, or instability. Our understanding of how we can best support these patients undergoing revision knee replacement procedures is limited. This study aimed to explore patients' experiences of having a problematic knee replacement and the impact of undergoing knee revision surgery for aseptic, elective reasons. METHODS: Qualitative semi structured interviews with 15 patients (8 women, 7 men; mean age 70 years: range 54-81) who had undergone revision knee surgery for a range of aseptic, elective indications in the last 12 months at an NHS Major Revision Knee Centre. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, de-identified and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We developed six themes: Soldiering on; The challenge of navigating the health system; I am the expert in my own knee; Shift in what I expected from surgery; I am not the person I used to be; Lingering uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Living with a problematic knee replacement and undergoing knee revision surgery has significant impact on all aspects of patients' lives. Our findings highlight the need for patients with problematic knee replacements to be supported to access care and assessment, and for long-term psychological and rehabilitation support before and after revision surgery.

Re-revision Knee Arthroplasty in a Tertiary Center: Infection and Multiple Previous Surgeries Were Associated With Poor Early Clinical and Functional Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of re-revision knee arthroplasty (re-revision KA) is increasing and associated with high complication and failure rates. The aim of this study was to investigate re-revision rates, complications, and patient-reported outcomes following re-revision KA and factors associated with poor outcome. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 206 patients (250 knees) undergoing re-revision KA at a major revision center from 2015 to 2018. The mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 0 to 61) and mean age at re-revision KA was 69 years (range, 31 to 91 years). The main indications for surgery were prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 171/250, 68.4%) and aseptic loosening (n = 25/250, 10.0%). We compared re-revision rates, joint function, and complications for aseptic and infective indications. Logistic regressions were performed to identify risk factors for further reoperation. RESULTS: The estimated re-revision rates at 2 years were 28.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.7-35.9) and at 4 years were 42.0% (95% CI: 32.8-52.6). Mean Oxford Knee Score was 26 points (range, 1 to 48). Mean EuroQoL-5D-5L utility was 0.539 (range, -0.511 to 1.000). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that PJI (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% CI 1.06-5.40, P = .036), greater number of previous surgeries (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.33, P = .008), and higher Elixhauser score (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.13, P = .045) were independently associated to further surgery. CONCLUSION: Re-revision KA carried a high risk of early failure. Multiple revised joints and patients with more comorbidities had worse function. Patients undergoing re-revision KA for PJI should be counseled to expect higher failure rates and complications than patients who have aseptic indications.

Indications and techniques for non-articulating spacers in massive bone loss following prosthetic knee joint infection: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a destructive complication of knee replacement surgery (KR). In two-stage revision a spacer is required to maintain limb length and alignment and provide a stable limb on which to mobilise. Spacers may be articulating or static with the gold standard spacer yet to be defined. The aims of this scoping review were to summarise the types of static spacer used to treat PJI after KR, their indications for use and early complication rates. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review based on the Joanna Briggs Institute's "JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis" Scoping review reported following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 2005 to 2022 for studies on the use of static spacers for PJI after KR. RESULTS: 41 studies (1230 patients/knees) were identified describing 42 static spacer constructs. Twenty-three (23/42 [54.2%]) incorporated cement augmented with metalwork, while nineteen (19/42, [45.9%]) were made of cement alone. Spacers were most frequently anchored in the diaphysis (22/42, [53.3%]), particularly in the setting of extensive bone loss (mean AORI Type = F3/T3; 11/15 studies 78.3% diaphyseal anchoring). 7.1% (79 of 1117 knees) of static spacers had a complication requiring further surgery prior to planned second stage with the most common complication being infection (86.1%). CONCLUSIONS: This study has summarised the large variety in static spacer constructs used for staged revision KR for PJI. Static spacers were associated with a high risk of complications and further work in this area is required to improve the quality of care in this vulnerable group.

Patient-Reported Function and Quality of Life After Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 10,727 Patients from the NHS PROMs Program.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). METHODS: A total of 10,727 patients undergoing elective rTKA were recruited from the UK National Health Service PROMs data set from 2013 to 2019. PROMs were collected at baseline and six months to assess joint function (Oxford Knee Score, OKS) and quality of life (EQ-5D). Associations with a change in the OKS (COKS) were investigated through multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The mean COKS was 12.4 (standard deviation 10.7) points. A total of 6776 of 10,329 (65.6%) patients demonstrated increase in the OKS above the minimal important change of 7.5 points. The median change in the EQ-5D utility was 0.227 (interquartile range 0.000 to 0.554). A total of 4917 of 9279 (53.0%) patients achieved a composite endpoint of improvement greater than the minimal important change for joint function and 'better' QoL as per the Paretian analysis. A total of 7477 of 10,727 (69.7%) patients reported satisfaction with rTKA. A total of 7947 of 10,727 (74.1%) patients felt surgery was a success. A total of 4888 of 10,632 (46.0%) patients reported one or more adverse events. A higher preoperative OKS was associated with a lower COKS (coefficient -0.63 [95% confidence interval -0.67 to -0.60]). Other factors associated with a lower COKS were postoperative complication(s), age under 60 years, longer duration of knee problems, patients who identified as disabled, problems in EQ-5D dimensions of anxiety/depression and self-care, comorbid conditions (circulatory problems, diabetes, and depression), and earlier year of procedure in the data set. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients experienced a meaningful improvement in joint function after rTKA. However, there was a high frequency of patient-reported complications. These findings may enable better informed discussion of the risks and benefits of discretionary rTKA.

Manipulation Under Anesthetic After Primary Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With a Higher Rate of Subsequent Revision Surgery.

AIM: To determine the association between manipulation under anesthetic (MUA) after primary knee arthroplasty and subsequent revision surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty from April 2011 to April 2016 with minimum 1-year follow-up to April 2017 were identified from the national hospital episode statistics for England. The first arthroplasty per patient, per side, was included; cases with a record of subsequent infection or periprosthetic fracture were excluded. Patients undergoing MUA within 1 year to the same knee were identified, defining the populations for the MUA and non-MUA cohorts. Mortality-adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (revision arthroplasty) was performed to a maximum of 6 years. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the hazard for revision, adjusting for type of primary arthroplasty, gender, age group, year, comorbidity index, obesity, regional deprivation, rurality, and ethnicity. RESULTS: A total of 309,650 primary arthroplasty cases (309,650 patients) were included. MUA within 1 year was recorded in 6882 patients (2.22%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.17-2.28) defining the MUA cohort; all others were included in the parallel non-MUA cohort. At 6 years, the mortality-adjusted estimated implant survival rate in the MUA cohort was 91.2% (95% CI, 90.0-92.2) in comparison to 98.1% (95% CI, 98.0-98.2) in the non-MUA cohort. In the fully adjusted model, this corresponded to an adjusted hazard for revision of 5.03 (hazard ratio; 95% CI, 4.55-5.57). CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent MUA within 1 year of primary arthroplasty were at a 5-fold increased risk of subsequent revision even after excluding cases of infection or fracture. Further investigation of the etiology of stiffness after primary knee arthroplasty and the optimal treatment options to improve outcomes is justified.

Cervical dural calcification and cervical myelopathy in X-linked hypophosphataemic rickets: a case report and review of the literature.

X-linked hypophosphataemic rickets (XLHR) is a genetic disorder resulting from a genetic mutation in the PHEX gene. This may cause ossification of soft tissue structures risking spinal cord compression. We present the first known case of cervical dural calcification secondary to XLHR to cause myelopathic symptoms due to cord compression.

Assessment of Emergency Department Eye Examinations in Patients Presenting with Mid-Face Injury.

BACKGROUND: One-fifth of patients with severe facial trauma suffer ophthalmic injury. Currently, patients presenting with mid-face injury to the emergency department (ED) undergo visual examination and then further assessment by ophthalmologists and with computed tomography (CT) scanning. The utility of the initial visual examination in the ED, performed by nonophthalmologists, remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to objectively identify whether a more thorough initial visual assessment, performed by nonophthalmologists in the ED, was associated with improved ophthalmic outcomes. METHODS: Patients (n = 100) were retrospectively recruited from a tertiary craniomaxillofacial center. Visual examinations performed in the ED were scored objectively and measured against defined management and prognostic outcomes. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between more thorough initial visual examination and reduced time to ophthalmology assessment or reduced visual complications. There was no correlation between more comprehensive examination and incidence of CT scanning. CONCLUSIONS: We identified no significant difference between a comprehensive visual examination performed by nonophthalmologists in the ED, and improved ophthalmic outcomes. Physicians assessing patients with mid-face trauma in the ED should rule out eye emergencies, including retrobulbar hemorrhage and penetrating globe injury, and initiate expeditious CT scan and assessment by specialist ophthalmologists.

Higher Blood Cobalt and Chromium Levels in Patients With Unilateral Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Arthroplasties Compared to Hip Resurfacings.

BACKGROUND: Adverse soft tissue reactions in metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements are associated with cobalt (Co) and chromium (Cr) ions in blood. We report the prevalence and risk factors for elevated blood Co and Cr levels in patients with a unilateral MoM hip. METHODS: From a single institution, blood Co and Cr levels were analyzed in 1748 patients (692 hip resurfacings and 1056 total hip arthroplasties [THAs]). Concentrations exceeding 7 ppb were considered elevated, and the risk factors for elevated levels were calculated with binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Elevated blood metal ion levels were more common in MoM THA than in resurfacing patients (17.4% vs 5.9%, P < .001), and in 5 of the 7 THA brands, more than 20% of patients had elevated metal ion concentrations, whereas the proportion was less than 10% in all hip resurfacings. In resurfacings, small femoral head (odds ratio [OR] 1.30 per millimeter decrease [CI, 1.12-1.49]), high acetabular inclination (OR 1.15 per degree increase [CI 1.09-1.22]), and young age (OR 1.05 per year decrease [1.02-1.10]) were independent risk factors for elevated ions. In the THA group, female gender (OR 2.04 [CI 1.35-3.06]), longer time between surgery and ion measurement (OR 1.19 per year increase [CI 1.05-1.34]), and large headsize (OR 1.07 per millimeter increase [CI 1.01-1.13]) were risk factors for elevated ions. CONCLUSION: Given the high percentage of elevated levels, the systematic surveillance of especially large diameter MoM THAs seems justified.

Method for the location of primary wear scars from retrieved metal on metal hip replacements.

BACKGROUND: Retrieved metal-on-metal acetabular cups are valuable resources in investigating the wear behaviour of failed hip implants, but adequate methods to do so are lacking. To further contribute to addressing this issue, we developed a method to detect the in vivo location of the primary wear scar of an explanted cup. METHODS: We proposed a new method in which thirteen patients with failed metal hip resurfacings were recruited, and their acetabular components retrieved. A 3D wear map was generated and the precise location of the primary wear scar in each cup was identified using a coordinate measuring machine. This wear scar location was noted in relation to the features on the acetabular cup. Having identified the location of the wear scar, this 3D positional map was co-registered to the implant on the patient's pelvic 3D CT scan. RESULTS: Using our proposed technique, we were able to demonstrate that the in vivo position of the primary wear scar in explanted metal acetabular cups can be variable. CONCLUSIONS: This method has utilised existing techniques to better understand the three-dimensional properties of wear behaviour, and may be a method which can be used in further studies to investigate variables that affect the position of the primary wear scar.

The effect of a manufacturer recall on the threshold to revise a metal-on-metal hip.

PURPOSE: Management of the unexplained, painful large diameter metal-on-metal (MOM) hip replacement is difficult. Although there are guidelines for surgeons, there is no clear documented evidence describing the overall threshold for revision surgery. The 2010 product recall of the DePuy Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and subsequent media coverage may have increased patient and surgeon apprehension, resulting in earlier intervention, i.e. at a greater Oxford hip score (OHS) than expected. Our aim was to investigate whether the threshold for revision using known parameters was affected by the ASR recall. These parameters include poor clinical results (persistent pain or mechanical symptoms), pseudotumour or other progressive soft tissue involvement, osteolysis and high or rising metal ion levels. METHODS: We used our national referral database of MOM hips, which were revised between 2008 and 2012. Once inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, we identified 240 patients--71 patients in the pre-recall group and 169 patients in the post-recall group. RESULTS: The ASR product recall did not seem to affect the threshold for revision of a MOM hip, with no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the functional (median OHS = 17 pre-recall and 20 post-recall; p = 0.2109) and radiological (median inclination angle = 50 pre-recall and 48 post-recall; p = 0.3221) markers used to guide management. We did however discover that blood metal ion levels were higher in the post-recall group. CONCLUSION: Issue of a product recall did not change the hip function threshold for revision surgery. The decision to revise a metal-on-metal hip is complex and should follow published guidelines, encompassing metal ion measurement and cross-sectional imaging where appropriate.

Cross-sectional imaging of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties. Can we substitute MARS MRI with CT?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI is widely advocated for surveillance of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties (MOM-HAs). However, its use is limited by susceptibility artifact at the prosthesis-bone interface, local availability, patient compliance, and cost (Hayter et al. 2011a). We wanted to determine whether CT is a suitable substitute for MARS MRI in evaluation of the painful MOM-HA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 50 MOM-HA patients (30 female) with unexplained painful prostheses underwent MARS MRI and CT imaging. 2 observers who were blind regarding the clinical data objectively reported the following outcomes: soft tissue lesions (pseudotumors), muscle atrophy, and acetabular and femoral osteolysis. Diagnostic test characteristics were calculated. RESULTS: Pseudotumor was diagnosed in 25 of 50 hips by MARS MRI and in 11 of 50 by CT. Pseudotumors were classified as type 1 (n=2), type 2A (n=17), type 2B (n=4), and type 3 (n=2) by MARS MRI. CT did not permit pseudotumor classification. The sensitivity of CT for diagnosis of pseudotumor was 44% (95% CI: 25-65). CT had "slight" agreement with MARS MRI for quantification of muscle atrophy (κ=0.23, CI: 0.16-0.29; p<0.01). Osteolysis was identified in 15 of 50 patients by CT. 4 of these lesions were identified by MARS MRI. INTERPRETATION: CT was found to be superior to MRI for detection of osteolysis adjacent to MOM-HA, and should be incorporated into diagnostic algorithms. CT was unable to classify and failed to detect many pseudotumors, and it was unreliable for assessment of muscle atrophy. Where MARS MRI is contraindicated or unavailable, CT would be an unsuitable substitute and other modalities such as ultrasound should be considered.

Changes in blood ion levels after removal of metal-on-metal hip replacements: 16 patients followed for 0-12 months.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) hip prostheses, pain and joint effusions may be associated with elevated blood levels of cobalt and chromium ions. Since little is known about the kinetics of metal ion clearance from the body and the rate of resolution of elevated blood ion levels, we examined the time course of cobalt and chromium ion levels after revision of MoM hip replacements. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 16 patients (13 female) who underwent revision of a painful MoM hip (large diameter, modern bearing) without fracture or infection, and who had a minimum of 4 blood metal ion measurements over an average period of 6.1 (0-12) months after revision. RESULTS: Average blood ion concentrations at the time of revision were 22 ppb for chromium and 43 ppb for cobalt. The change in ion levels after revision surgery varied extensively between patients. In many cases, over the second and third months after revision surgery ion levels decreased to 50% of the values measured at revision. Decay of chromium levels occurred more slowly than decay of cobalt levels, with a 9% lag in return to normal levels. The rate of decay of both metals followed second-order (exponential) kinetics more closely than first-order (linear) kinetics. INTERPRETATION: The elimination of cobalt and chromium from the blood of patients who have undergone revision of painful MoM hip arthroplasties follows an exponential decay curve with a half-life of approximately 50 days. Elevated blood levels of cobalt and chromium ions can persist for at least 1 year after revision, especially in patients with high levels of exposure.

A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of MARS MRI and ultrasound of the painful metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI and ultrasound scanning (USS) can both be used to detect pseudotumors, abductor muscle atrophy, and tendinous pathology in patients with painful metal-on-metal (MOM) hip arthroplasty. We wanted to determine the diagnostic test characteristics of USS using MARS MRI as a reference for detection of pseudotumors and muscle atrophy. PatienTS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study to compare MARS MRI and USS findings in 19 consecutive patients with unilateral MOM hips. Protocolized USS was performed by consultant musculoskeletal radiologists who were blinded regarding clinical details. Reports were independently compared with MARS MRI, the imaging gold standard, to calculate predictive values. RESULTS: The prevalence of pseudotumors on MARS MRI was 68% (95% CI: 43-87) and on USS it was 53% (CI: 29-76). The sensitivity of USS in detecting pseudotumors was 69% (CI 39-91) and the specificity was 83% (CI: 36-97). The sensitivity of detection of abductor muscle atrophy was 47% (CI: 24-71). In addition, joint effusion was detected in 10 cases by USS and none were seen by MARS MRI. INTERPRETATION: We found a poor agreement between USS and MARS MRI. USS was inferior to MARS MRI for detection of pseudotumors and muscle atrophy, but it was superior for detection of joint effusion and tendinous pathologies. MARS MRI is more advantageous than USS for practical reasons, including preoperative planning and longitudinal comparison.

Revision of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty in a tertiary center: a prospective study of 39 hips with between 1 and 4 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Operative findings during revision of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty (MOMHA) vary widely and can involve massive soft tissue and bone disruption. As a result, planning of theater time and resources is difficult, surgery is challenging, and outcomes are often poor. We describe our experience with revision of MOMHA and provide recommendations for management. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We present the findings and outcomes of 39 consecutive MOMHAs (in 35 patients) revised in a tertiary unit (median follow-up time 30 (12-54) months). The patients underwent a preoperative work-up including CT, metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI, and blood metal ion levels. RESULTS: We determined 5 categories of failure. 8 of 39 hips had conventional failure mechanisms including infection and impingement. Of the other 31 hips, 14 showed synovitis without significant disruption of soft tissue; 6 had a cystic pseudotumor with significant soft tissue disruption; 7 had significant osteolysis; and 4 had a solid pseudotumor. Each category of failure had specific surgical hazards that could be addressed preoperatively. There were 2 reoperations and 1 patient (2 hips) died of an unrelated cause. Median Oxford hip score (OHS) was 37 (9-48); median change (ΔOHS) was 17 (-10 to 41) points. ΔOHS was similar in all groups-except those patients with solid pseudotumors and those revised to metal-on-metal bearings, who fared worse. INTERPRETATION: Planning in revision MOMHA is aided by knowledge of the different categories of failure to enable choice of appropriate personnel, theater time, and equipment. With this knowledge, satisfactory outcomes can be achieved in revision of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty.

Overcoming floor and ceiling effects in knee arthroplasty outcome measurement.

Aims: To map the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and High Activity Arthroplasty Score (HAAS) items to a common scale, and to investigate the psychometric properties of this new scale for the measurement of knee health. Methods: Patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) data measuring knee health were obtained from the NHS PROMs dataset and Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial (TOPKAT). Assumptions for common scale modelling were tested. A graded response model (fitted to OKS item responses in the NHS PROMs dataset) was used as an anchor to calibrate paired HAAS items from the TOPKAT dataset. Information curves for the combined OKS-HAAS model were plotted. Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare common scale scores derived from OKS and HAAS items. A conversion table was developed to map between HAAS, OKS, and the common scale. Results: We included 3,329 response sets from 528 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty. These generally met the assumptions of unidimensionality, monotonicity, local independence, and measurement invariance. The HAAS items provided more information than OKS items at high levels of knee health. Combining both instruments resulted in higher test-level information than either instrument alone. The mean error between common scale scores derived from the OKS and HAAS was 0.29 logits. Conclusion: The common scale allowed more precise measurement of knee health than use of either the OKS or HAAS individually. These techniques for mapping PROM instruments may be useful for the standardization of outcome reporting, and pooling results across studies that use either PROM in individual-patient meta-analysis.

Item response theory may account for unequal item weighting and individual-level measurement error in trials that use PROMs: a psychometric sensitivity analysis of the TOPKAT trial.

OBJECTIVES: To apply item response theory as a framework for studying measurement error in superiority trials which use patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: We reanalyzed data from the The Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial, which compared the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) responses of patients undergoing partial or total knee replacement, using traditional sum-scoring, after accounting for OKS item characteristics with expected a posteriori (EAP) scoring, and after accounting for individual-level measurement error with plausible value imputation (PVI). We compared the marginalized mean scores of each group at baseline, 2 months, and yearly for 5 years. We used registry data to estimate the minimal important difference (MID) of OKS scores with sum-scoring and EAP scoring. RESULTS: With sum-scoring, we found statistically significant differences in mean OKS score at 2 months (P = 0.030) and 1 year (P = 0.030). EAP scores produced slightly different results, with statistically significant differences at 1 year (P = 0.041) and 3 years (P = 0.043). With PVI, there were no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION: Psychometric sensitivity analyses can be readily performed for superiority trials using PROMs and may aid the interpretation of results.

Item response theory assumptions were adequately met by the Oxford hip and knee scores.

OBJECTIVES: To develop item response theory (IRT) models for the Oxford hip and knee scores which convert patient responses into continuous scores with quantifiable precision and provide these as web applications for efficient score conversion. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data from the National Health Service patient-reported outcome measures program were used to test the assumptions of IRT (unidimensionality, monotonicity, local independence, and measurement invariance) before fitting models to preoperative response patterns obtained from patients undergoing primary elective hip or knee arthroplasty. The hip and knee datasets contained 321,147 and 355,249 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Scree plots, Kaiser criterion analyses, and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed unidimensionality and Mokken analysis confirmed monotonicity of both scales. In each scale, all item pairs shared a residual correlation of ≤ 0.20. At the test level, both scales showed measurement invariance by age and gender. Both scales provide precise measurement in preoperative settings but demonstrate poorer precision and ceiling effects in postoperative settings. CONCLUSION: We provide IRT parameters and web applications that can convert Oxford Hip Score or Oxford Knee Score response sets into continuous measurements and quantify individual measurement error. These can be used in sensitivity analyses or to administer truncated and individualized computerized adaptive tests.

Patient-relevant outcomes following elective, aseptic revision knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the evidence for the clinical effectiveness of revision knee arthroplasty (rKA) compared to non-operative treatment for the management of patients with elective, aseptic causes for a failed knee arthroplasty. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and PsychINFO were searched from inception to 1st December 2020 for studies on patients considering elective, aseptic rKA. Patient-relevant outcomes (PROs) were defined as implant survivorship, joint function, quality of life (QoL), complications and hospital admission impact. RESULTS: No studies compared elective, aseptic rKA to non-operative management. Forty uncontrolled studies reported on PROs following elective, aseptic rKA (434434 rKA). Pooled estimates for implant survivorship were: 95.5% (95% CI 93.2-97.7%) at 1 year [seven studies (5524 rKA)], 90.8% (95% CI 87.6-94.0%) at 5 years [13 studies (5754 rKA)], 87.4% (95% CI 81.7-93.1%) at 10 years [nine studies (2188 rKA)], and 83.2% (95% CI 76.7-89.7%) at 15 years [two studies (452 rKA)]. Twelve studies (2382 rKA) reported joint function and/or QoL: all found large improvements from baseline to follow-up. Mortality rates were low (0.16% to 2% within 1 year) [four studies (353064 rKA)]. Post-operative complications were common (9.1 to 37.2% at 90 days). CONCLUSION: Higher-quality evidence is needed to support patients with decision-making in elective, aseptic rKA. This should include studies comparing operative and non-operative management. Implant survivorship following elective, aseptic rKA was ~ 96% at 1 year, ~ 91% at 5 years and ~ 87% at 10 years. Early complications were common after elective, aseptic rKA and the rates summarised here can be shared with patients during informed consent. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020196922.

Epidemiology of revision hip replacement surgery in the UK over the past 15 years-an analysis from the National Joint Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate trends in the incidence rate and main indication for revision hip replacement (rHR) over the past 15 years in the UK. DESIGN: Repeated national cross-sectional study from 2006 to 2020. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: rHR procedures were identified from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and the States of Guernsey. Population statistics were obtained from the Office for National Statistics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Crude incidence rates of rHR. RESULTS: The incidence rate of rHR doubled from 11 per 100 000 adults in 2006 (95% CI 10.7 to 11.3) to a peak of 22 per 100 000 adults (95% CI 22 to 23) in 2012, before falling to 17 per 100 000 adults in 2019 (95% CI 16 to 17) (24.5% decrease from peak). The incidence rate of rHR reduced by 39% in 2020 compared with 2019 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). The most frequent indications for rHR between 2006 and 2019 were loosening/lysis (27.8%), unexplained pain (15.1%) and dislocation/instability (14.7%). There were incremental increases in the annual number and incidence rates of rHR for fracture, infection, dislocation/instability and a decrease in rHR for aseptic loosening/lysis. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence rate of rHR doubled from 2006 to 2012, likely due to high early failure rates of metal-on-metal hip replacements. The incidence of rHR then decreased by approximately 25% from 2012 to 2019, followed by a large decrease during the COVID-19 pandemic. The decrease in the number of rHR performed for aseptic loosening/lysis may reflect improved wear and implant longevity. Increased healthcare resource will be required to care for the increasing numbers of patients undergoing rHR for fracture and infection.

Patient-Relevant Outcomes Following First Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty, by Diagnosis: An Analysis of Implant Survivorship, Mortality, Serious Medical Complications, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Utilizing the National Joint Registry Data Set.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate patient-relevant outcomes following first revision total knee arthroplasties (rTKAs) performed for different indications. METHODS: This population-based cohort study utilized data from the United Kingdom National Joint Registry, Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care, National Health Service Patient-Reported Outcome Measures, and the Civil Registrations of Death. Patients undergoing a first rTKA between January 1, 2009, and June 30, 2019, were included in our data set. Patient-relevant outcomes included implant survivorship (up to 11 years postoperatively), mortality and serious medical complications (up to 90 days postoperatively), and patient-reported outcome measures (at 6 months postoperatively). RESULTS: A total of 24,540 first rTKAs were analyzed. The patient population was 54% female and 62% White, with a mean age at the first rTKA of 69 years. At 2 years postoperatively, the cumulative incidence of re-revision surgery ranged from 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9% to 3.4%) following rTKA for progressive arthritis to 16.3% (95% CI, 15.2% to 17.4%) following rTKA for infection. The mortality rate at 90 days was highest following rTKA for fracture (3.6% [95% CI, 2.5% to 5.1%]) and for infection (1.8% [95% CI, 1.5% to 2.2%]) but was <0.5% for other indications. The rate of serious medical complications requiring hospital admission within 90 days was highest for patients treated for fracture (21.8% [95% CI, 17.9% to 26.3%]) or infection (12.5% [95% CI, 11.2% to 13.9%]) and was lowest for those treated for progressive arthritis (4.3% [95% CI, 3.3% to 5.5%]). Patients who underwent rTKA for stiffness or unexplained pain had some of the poorest postoperative joint function (mean Oxford Knee Score, 24 and 25 points, respectively) and had the lowest proportion of responders (48% and 55%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study found large differences in patient-relevant outcomes among different indications for first rTKA. The rate of complications was highest following rTKA for fracture or infection. Although rTKA resulted in large improvements in joint function for most patients, those who underwent surgery for stiffness and unexplained pain had worse outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.