Outcome after total ankle replacement or ankle arthrodesis in end-stage ankle osteoarthritis on the basis of german-wide data: a retrospective comparative study over 10 years.

BACKGROUND: In symptomatic end-stage osteoarthritis of the ankle joint, total ankle replacement and ankle arthrodesis are the two primary surgical options for patients for whom conservative treatment fails. Published revision rates are often biased and difficult to compare. In this study, unplanned reoperation rates and revision rates were determined for both surgical interventions based on a large dataset, and risk factors for unplanned reoperations were identified. METHODS: German-wide health data of the largest German health-care insurance carrier between 2001 and 2012 were retrospectively analyzed, and unplanned reoperation rates within 10 years were determined for index surgeries conducted in 2001 and 2002. Unplanned reoperation rates within 5 years for index surgeries conducted in 2001/2002 were compared to index surgeries conducted in 2006/2007. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for unplanned reoperations. RESULTS: After ankle arthrodesis, 19% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16-22%) of 741 patients needed to undergo an unplanned reoperation within ten years. After total ankle replacement, the unplanned reoperation rate was 38% [95% CI, 29-48%] among 172 patients. For initial surgeries conducted at a later date, unplanned reoperation rates within five years were 21% [95% CI, 19-24%] for 1,168 ankle arthrodesis patients and 23% [95% CI, 19-28%] for 561 total ankle replacement patients. Significant risk factors for unplanned reoperations after ankle arthrodesis in the initial cohort were age < 50 years (odds ratio [OR] = 4.65 [95% CI 1.10;19.56]) and osteoporosis (OR = 3.72 [95% CI, 1.06;13.11]); after total ankle replacement, they were osteoporosis (OR = 2.96 [95% CI, 1.65;5.31]), Patient Clinical Complexity Level (PCCL) grade 3 (OR = 2.19 [95% CI, 1.19;4.03]), PCCL grade 4 (OR = 2.51 [95% CI, 1.22;5.17]) and diabetes mellitus (OR = 2.48 [95% CI, 1.33;4.66]). Kaplan-Meier analyses including 1,525 ankle arthrodesis patients and 644 total ankle replacement patients revealed an average unplanned reoperation-free time of approximately 17 years for both procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Similar revision rates and unplanned reoperation rates for both procedures in the later-date cohort can likely be attributed to a learning curve for surgeons as well as advances in implant design. This analysis of billing health insurance data supports an increase in total ankle replacement surgeries.

Increased risk for early revision with quadriceps graft compared with patellar tendon graft in primary ACL reconstructions.

PURPOSE: Bone patella-tendon bone (BPTB) and hamstring tendon (HT) autografts are the most used grafts in primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions (ACLR) in Norway. Quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft has gained more popularity during the past years. The purpose of this study is to compare revision rates and patient-reported outcomes of primary QT with BPTB and HT autograft ACL reconstructions in Norway at 2-year follow-up. It was hypothesized that there would be no difference in 2-year revision rates between all three autografts. METHODS: Data included primary ACLR without concomitant ligament surgeries, registered in the Norwegian Knee Ligament Register from 2004 through 2021. Revision rates at 2 years were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Hazard ratios (HR) for revision were estimated using multivariable Cox regression analysis with revision within 2 years as endpoint. Mean change in patient-reported outcome was recorded preoperatively and at 2 years through the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subcategories 'Sport' and 'Quality of Life' was measured for patients that were not revised and analysed with multiple linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 24,790 primary ACLRs were identified, 10,924 with BPTB, 13,263 with HT and 603 with a QT graft. Patients in the QT group were younger (23.5 years), more of them were women (58.2%) and over 50% had surgery <3 months after injury. The QT group had the highest prevalence of meniscal injuries (61.9%). Revision estimates at 2-years were 3.6%, 2.5% and 1.2% for QT, HT and BPTB, respectively (p < 0.001). In a Cox regression analysis with QT as reference, BPTB had a lower risk of revision (HR 0.4, 95% Cl 0.2-0.7, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed in the revision risk between QT and HT (HR 1.1, 95% Cl 0.7-1.8, n.s.). The two most common reported reasons for revision were: traumatic graft rupture and nontraumatic graft failure. There were no differences between the groups in change of KOOS in subcategories 'Sport' and 'Quality of Life' at 2-years follow-up. CONCLUSION: The 2-year risk of revision after ACLR with QT was higher than BPTB and similar to HT. No difference was found between the groups in patient-reported outcomes. This study provides valuable insights for both surgeons and patients when making decisions about the choice of autografts in primary ACL reconstructions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Graft choice and techniques used in elbow ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction over the last 20 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elbow medial ulnar collateral ligament (mUCL) injuries have become increasingly common, leading to a higher number of mUCL reconstructions (UCLR). Various techniques and graft choices have been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of each available graft choice, the surgical techniques most utilized, and the reported complications associated with each surgical method. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysesguidelines. We queried PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify all articles that included UCLR between January 2002 and October 2022. We included all studies that referenced UCLR graft choice, surgical technique, and/or ulnar nerve transposition. Studies were evaluated in a narrative fashion to assess demographics and report current trends in utilization and complications of UCLR as they pertain to graft choice and surgical techniques over the past 20 years. Where possible, we stratified based on graft and technique. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were included, reporting on 6671 elbows. The cohort was 98% male, had a weighted mean age of 21 years and follow-up of 53 months. There were 6146 UCLRs (92%) performed with an autograft and 152 (2.3%) that utilized an allograft, while 373 (5.6%) were from mixed cohorts of autograft and allograft. Palmaris longus autograft was the most utilized mUCL graft choice (64%). The most utilized surgical configuration was the figure-of-8 (68%). Specifically, the most common techniques were the modified Jobe technique (37%), followed by American Sports Medicine Institute (ASMI) (22%), and the docking (22%) technique. A concomitant ulnar nerve transposition was performed in 44% of all patients, with 1.9% of these patients experiencing persistent ulnar nerve symptoms after ulnar nerve transposition. Of the total cohort, 14% experienced postoperative ulnar neuritis with no prior preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms. Further, meta-analysis revealed a significantly greater revision rate with the use of allografts compared to autograft and mixed cohorts (2.6% vs. 1.8% and 1.9%, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Most surgeons performed UCLR with palmaris autograft utilizing a figure-of-8 graft configuration, specifically with the modified Jobe technique. The overall rate of allograft use was 2.3%, much lower than expected. The revision rate for UCLR with allograft appears to be greater compared to UCLR with autograft, although this may be secondary to limited allograft literature.

Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty compared to total elbow replacement for distal humeral fractures: a registry analysis of 906 procedures.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow replacement (TER) is an accepted treatment for complex intra-articular distal humerus fractures in elderly patients. Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty (HA) is also a potential surgical option for unreconstructable fractures and avoids the concerns regarding mechanical wear and functional restrictions associated with TER. In the current literature, there are limited data available to compare the revision rates of HA and TER for the treatment of fracture. We used data from a large national arthroplasty registry to compare the outcome of HA and TER undertaken for fracture/dislocation and to assess the impact of demographics and implant choice on revision rates. METHODS: Data obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry from May 2, 2005, to December 31, 2021, included all procedures for primary elbow replacement with primary diagnosis of fracture or dislocation. The analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: There were 293 primary HA and 631 primary TER procedures included. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) rate at 9 years was 9.7% for HA (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0, 15.7), and 11.9% (95% CI 8.5, 16.6) for TER. When adjusted for age and gender, there was a significantly higher risk of revision after 3 months for TER compared to HA (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.22, 5.03, P = .012). There was no difference in the rate of revision for patients aged <55 years or ≥75 years when HA and TER procedures were compared. In primary TER procedures, loosening was the most common cause of revision (3.6% of primary TER procedures), and the most common type of revision in primary TER involved revision of the humeral component only (2.6% of TER procedures). TER has a higher rate of first revision for loosening compared to HA (HR 4.21, 95% CI 1.29, 13.73; P = .017). In HA procedures, instability (1.7%) was the most common cause for revision. The addition of an ulna component was the most common type of revision (2.4% of all HA procedures). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of distal humerus fractures, HA had a lower revision rate than TER after 3 months when adjusted for age and gender. Age <55 or ≥75 years was not a risk factor for revision when HA was compared to TER. Loosening leading to revision is more prevalent in TER and increases with time. In HA, the most common type of revision involved addition of an ulna component with preservation of the humeral component.

Medium-term results of inlay vs. onlay humeral components for reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a New Zealand Joint Registry study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare medium-term results of inlay and onlay humeral components in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Specifically, we report differences in revision rate and functional outcomes between the 2 designs. METHODS: The 3 most used inlay (in-RSA) and onlay (on-RSA) implants by volume from the New Zealand Joint Registry were included in the study. In-RSA was defined as having a humeral tray that recessed within the metaphyseal bone, whereas on-RSA was defined as having a humeral tray that rested on the epiphyseal osteotomy surface. The primary outcome was revision up to 8 years postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), implant survival, and revision cause for in-RSA and on-RSA as well as individual prostheses. RESULTS: There were 6707 patients (5736 in-RSA; 971 on-RSA) included in the study. For all causes, in-RSA demonstrated a lower revision rate compared to on-RSA (revision rate/100 component years: in-RSA 0.665, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.569-0.768; on-RSA 1.010, 95% CI 0.673-1.415). However, the mean 6-month OSS was higher for the on-RSA group (mean difference 2.20, 95% CI 1.37-3.03; P < .001). However, this was not clinically significant. At 5 years, there were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to the OSS. CONCLUSION: The medium-term survival of in-RSA was higher than that of on-RSA. However, functional outcomes at 6 months were better for on-RSA compared to in-RSA. Further follow-up is required to understand the long-term survivorship and functional outcomes between these designs.

Increased Rates of Late Periprosthetic Fractures in Larger Hydroxyapatite-Coated Cementless Stems: Are Collared Stems a Better Alternative for Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Cementless hip stems are widely used for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and have demonstrated excellent survivorship. This study aimed to investigate the effects of stem size and calcar collars on rates of revision due to periprosthetic fracture. METHODS: All primary THA procedures recorded by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from September 1999 to December 2021 for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis using a single cementless hip stem with modern bearings were included. The primary outcome measure was revision due to periprosthetic fracture. Stems were divided into 2 groups for comparison, large (size 14 to 20) and small-medium (6 to 13). A subanalysis was performed for collared stems. A total of 59,518 primary THA procedures were included. RESULTS: The cumulative percent revision for periprosthetic fracture was significantly higher for large stems compared to small-medium stems (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.57 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.18, 2.09] P = .002). Furthermore, collared stems had significantly lower revision rates due to late periprosthetic fracture compared to collarless variants (2 week + HR = 4.55 [95% CI 3.23, 6.42], P < .001). Large collarless stems were found to have greater revision rates due to fracture compared to small-medium collarless stems (HR = 1.55 [95% CI 1.13, 2.12] P = .006), but no difference was found between collared groups (HR = 1.37 [95% CI 0.68, 2.78] P = .382). CONCLUSION: Large cementless hip stems have a higher rate of revision due to periprosthetic fracture compared to small-medium stems. Using a collared stem reduces the rate of periprosthetic fracture.

Incidence and Predictors of Subsidence Using Modular, Tapered, Fluted Titanium Femoral Stems in Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Tapered, fluted titanium (TFT) femoral stems have become the gold standard in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). However, there is a paucity of data on TFT stem subsidence rates following aseptic rTHA. Subsidence can lead to instability, mechanical failure, leg-length discrepancy, and may require revision surgery. This study evaluated the incidences and predictors of TFT subsidence in aseptic rTHA. METHODS: A total of 102 TFT femoral stems of 4 designs were retrospectively reviewed. Stem subsidence was measured on digital radiographs taken immediately after surgery and at standard clinical follow-up. Patient characteristics, risk factors for subsidence, revision etiologies, and implant characteristics were recorded. Patient-reported outcome measures were also evaluated for a subset of cases. RESULTS: Overall, 12% of stems subsided >1 cm, and subsidence was minimal (<3 mm) in ≥64% of cases. From immediate postoperative to 1-month radiographic follow-up, 79% of stems subsided a mean of 2.9 mm (range, 0.1 to 12 mm). Beyond 1 month, subsidence was minimal for ≥77% of cases. In multivariate analyses, women and less femoral implant canal fill were associated with greater subsidence (P ≤ .034). The TFT stem design was not associated with early subsidence (P = .816). There were no modular junction fractures. There were 2 fractures and 2 subsidence-related revisions for aseptic loosening that occurred postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The amount of subsidence in TFT stems was low and was detectable in the early (less than 1 year) postoperative period. Maximizing TFT stem fill within the femoral canal appears to reduce the risk of subsidence without increasing femoral fracture rates and should be the goal with implantation of these devices. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV-Case Series, No Control Group.

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.

Head size in Delta ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: a comparative registry study.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal bearing size in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been clearly ascertained, but large diameter ceramic balls may improve function and implant stability, with minimal concerns for wear. Delta ceramic-on-ceramic (COC) THA were stratified based on head diameter (32, 36 and 40 mm), aiming to assess: 1) survival rates, reasons for revision and hazard ratios for failure; 2) survival rates and hazard ratios for aseptic loosening, dislocation/primary instability, liner failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A regional arthroplasty registry was enquired about Delta COC THA performed for primary osteoarthritis, stratified by head size. 13,161 primary cementless THAs were included in the study, with a mean follow-up of 5.7 years (range: 0-17): 3980 (30.2%) 32 mm balls, 8327 (63.3%) 36 mm heads, 854 (6.5%) 40 mm heads. RESULTS: The three cohorts achieved similar survival rates (p = 0.99) and adjusted hazard ratios (p > 0.05). No revisions for head breakage or metallosis occurred. When revision for cup aseptic loosening was the endpoint, the survival rates of three cohorts (p = 0.08) and the adjusted hazard ratios (p > 0.05) were similar. The three cohorts achieved comparable survival rates when revision for dislocation/primary instability was the endpoint (p = 0.08). When the endpoint was revision for liner breakage, 32 mm cohort showed higher rates of revision (p = 0.01). No liner failure was detected in the 40 mm cohort. CONCLUSIONS: 32 mm, 36 mm and 40 mm provided similar 10-year survival rates in Delta COC THA. 40 mm heads emerged as safe options but did not lower the revisions for dislocations/primary instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (therapeutic study).

Correlation of revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical studies and worldwide arthroplasty registers.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to elucidate differences and similarities in revision rates amongst studies and national registers featuring total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Thereby comparability and reproducibility between study and register findings should be created. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical studies published between 2004 and September 2023 involving TKA or UKA were reviewed for total arthroplasty numbers, revision rates and demographic data. Findings were calculated as "revisions per 100 component years (CY)" and divided according to the nationality of the center. National arthroplasty registers were searched for numbers of arthroplasties and revisions alongside with demographic data. Revision rates in registers were compared to one another and comparison to revision rates from collected studies was drawn. RESULTS: After evaluation, 98 studies and seven registers met our inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Cumulative percent revision rate in studies was 3.35% after a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, corresponding to 0.71 revisions per 100 CY for TKA and 7.67% after a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, corresponding to 1.3 revisions per 100 CY for UKA. Registers showed mean overall revision rates of 5.63% for TKA and 11.04% for UKA. CONCLUSIONS: A positive correlation of revision rates of TKA and UKA in studies and registers was found, with overall revision rates of UKA comparted to TKA being 2.29 times higher in clinical studies and 1.96 times higher in registers. Revision rates in registers were 1.56 times higher than presented in clinical studies.

Aseptic midterm survival rates between different cemented tibial stem designs in hinged total knee arthroplasty: a 6-year evaluation from the German Arthroplasty Registry.

INTRODUCTION: The rate of revision TKA and thus the use of hinged implants (HI) steadily rises. Aseptic loosening lies on the top of the failure patterns. However, no evidence exists until now based on national scale high-caseloads that analyzes the impact of cemented HI stem-design on aseptic survival rates. METHODS: Data on aseptic HI-revisions with full-cemented tibia-stems were conducted from the German Arthroplasty Registry. Cases were divided in primary HI (PHI) and HI used in revision operations (RHI). Endpoint was a new revision following either a PHI or an RHI. The impact of stem conicity (conical vs. cylindrical), diameter (≤ 13 mm vs. > 13 mm), length (≤ 90 mm vs. > 90 mm) and offset on the 6-Year-Cumulative-Aseptic-Revision-Rate (6Y-CARR) was estimated via Kaplan-Meier curve and compared between groups via Log-Rank-Tests. RESULTS: 3953 PHI and 2032 RHI fulfilled inclusion-criteria. Stem conicity had no impact on 6Y-CARR (p = 0.08 and p = 0.8). Diameter > 13 mm hat an impact on PHI (p = 0.05) with lower 6Y-CARR but not on RHI (p = 0.2). Length > 90 mm showed significantly worst 6Y-CARR in PHI (p = 0.0001) but not in RHI (p = 0.3). Offset-stems showed significantly better 6Y-CARR in PHI (p = 0.04), but not in RHI (p = 0.7). CONCLUSION: There was no significant impact of the cemented tibia-stem conicity on 6Y-CARR, neither in PHI nor in RHI. The effect of length, diameter and offset on the 6Y-CARR observed in the PHI, was not detectable in the more complex RHI-cases reflecting its limited clinical relevance by itself in more multifactorial backgrounds. Therefore, results must be interpreted with caution due to considerable system-effects and different utilization-scenarios.

Valgus alignment of the femoral component is associated with higher revision rates 10 years after TKA.

PURPOSE: Appropriate positioning and alignment of tibial and femoral component in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are factors of major importance directly related to patient satisfaction and implant survival. Most literature works elaborate on overall post-operative alignment and its correlation to implant survival. However, less is known about the impact of individual component alignment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of undercorrection of overall alignment as well as the effect of individual tibial and femoral component alignment on the post-operative failure rate after total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Clinical and radiographic data of primary TKA cases from 2002 to 2004, with a minimum of 10-year follow-up, were retrospectively reviewed. The pre- and post-operative hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA) and mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (mMPTA) were measured on weight-bearing, full-length antero-posterior lower limb radiographs. Statistical analysis was performed to establish the correlation between both overall and implant alignment and revision rate. RESULTS: In total, 379 primary TKA cases were evaluated. The mean time of follow-up was 12.9 years (range 10.3-15.9 years, SD = 1.8). Nine out of 379 cases were revised due to aseptic loosening; the mean time to revision was 5.5 years (range 1.0-15.5 years, SD = 4.6). Varus undercorrection of overall alignment was not associated with a higher rate of revision (p = 0.316). Post-operative valgus femoral alignment (mLDFA < 87°) contributed to a significant decreased prosthesis survival in contrast to neutral femoral alignment (revision rate valgus group: 10.7% and neutral group: 1.7%; p = 0.003). Post-operative tibial mechanical alignment was not identified as a significant predictor for implant survival (revision rate varus group: 2.9% and neutral group: 2.4%; p = 0.855). CONCLUSIONS: Primary TKA showed significantly higher revision rates when the femoral component was placed in > 3° of valgus (mLDFA < 87°). In contrast, postoperative overall residual varus alignment (HKA) and varus alignment of the tibial component were not related to higher revision rates at a minimum 10-year follow-up after TKA. These findings should be considered when choosing component position in individualised TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Ten-year follow-up of a total knee prosthesis combining multi-radius, ultra-congruency, posterior-stabilization and mobile-bearing insert shows long-lasting clinically relevant improvements in pain, stiffness, function and stability.

PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data available on total knee prostheses combining dual-radius, ultra-congruency, posterior-stabilization and mobile-bearing insert. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the clinical evolution of the FIRST® prosthesis (Symbios Orthopédie, Yverdon, CH), the earliest prosthesis with this particular design. It was hypothesized that the primary outcomes, evaluating pain, stiffness, function and stability, would improve following arthroplasty and remain improved during the follow-up period of 10 years. METHODS: All patients programmed for a total knee arthroplasty using a FIRST® prosthesis at our university hospital between 2006 and 2008 were invited to participate. Study knees were evaluated pre-operatively as well as one, five and ten years post-operatively. Patients filled out questionnaires at each evaluation point and had a radiographic assessment at the five-year and ten-year follow-ups. Primary outcomes were the total, pain, stiffness and function measures of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis questionnaire (WOMAC) and the knee and function measures of the Knee Society Score (KSS). Friedman and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests were used to compare measures across time points. RESULTS: Hundred and twenty four prostheses were included (baseline demographics: 69.9 ± 8.3 years old, 28.1 ± 4.3 kg/m2, 54% male) and 68 could be followed during ten years. Five prostheses underwent a revision. All other prostheses lost at follow-up were lost for reasons unrelated to the prosthesis. All primary measures reported statistically and clinically significant improvements between baseline and the three follow-up evaluations. Statistically significant improvements at the three follow-up evaluations were also observed for most secondary measures. There was no implant loosening. At ten-year follow-up, radiolucent lines were observed in 2.9% femoral implants and 1.5% tibial implants. CONCLUSION: The positive results observed in all domains of assessment and the small revision rate demonstrated an effective functioning of the FIRST® prosthesis during the ten-year follow-up period. The results, globally similar to those previously published for other prosthesis designs, encourage the development of assistive methods to select the most appropriate designs on an individual basis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, prospective cohort study.

Higher revision rates in patients with preoperative contralateral pes planovalgus deformity following total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of revision in those with pes planovalgus deformity to those without using a large national database. Given the reciprocal changes in lower extremity alignment associated with planovalgus foot deformity, it has been suggested that patients with this deformity has worse outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing elective TKA was conducted using the PearlDiver database. Patients were stratified into three cohorts: those without pes planovalgus, patients with ipsilateral or bilateral pes planovalgus relative to the TKA, and patients with contralateral pes planovalgus. Patients with prior foot reconstructive surgery were excluded. The cohorts were each matched to those without pes planovalgus. Bivariate analysis was performed comparing 90-day medical complications and 2- and 4-year revisions following TKA. An adjusted number needed to be exposed for one additional person to be harmed (NNEH) was calculated using the adjusted odds ratio (OR) and unexposed event rate. RESULTS: Following matched analysis, those with contralateral pes planovalgus had similar odds (OR 3.41; 95% CI 0.93-12.54; p = n.s.) for aseptic revision within 2 years but significantly higher odds (OR 3.35; 95% CI 1.08-10.41; p = 0.03) within 4 years when compared to those without a pes planovalgus deformity. Within 4 years, there was no significant difference in the incidence of aseptic revision (p = n.s.) in patients with ipsilateral/bilateral pes planovalgus. No patients in any cohort underwent septic revision within 4 years of TKA. CONCLUSION: This study found that patients with contralateral pes planovalgus deformity had higher odds of aseptic revision within 4 years following primary TKA in a national database, suggesting that the change in gait kinematics associated with this deformity could possibly be associated with increased revision rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Patients in high- and low-revision hospitals have similar outcomes after primary knee arthroplasty: 1-year postoperative results from the Danish prospective multicenter cohort study, SPARK.

PURPOSE: It is well-known that revision rates after primary knee arthroplasty vary widely. However, it is uncertain whether hospital revision rates are reliable indicators of general surgical quality as defined by patients. The SPARK study compared primary knee arthroplasty surgery at three high-volume hospitals whose revision rates differed for unknown reasons. METHODS: This prospective observational study included primary knee arthroplasty patients (total, medial/lateral unicompartmental and patellofemoral) in two low-revision hospitals (Aarhus University Hospital and Aalborg University Hospital Farsø) and one high-revision hospital (Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev-Gentofte). Patients were followed from preoperatively (2016-17) to 1-year postoperatively with patient-reported outcome measures including Oxford Knee Score (OKS), EQ-5D-5L and Copenhagen Knee ROM (range of motion) Scale. The surgical outcomes were compared across hospitals for patients with comparable grades of radiographic knee osteoarthritis and preoperative OKS. Statistical comparisons (parametric and non-parametric) included all three hospitals. RESULTS: 97% of the 1452 patients who provided baseline data (89% of those included and 56% of those operated) responded postoperatively (90% at 1 year). Hospitals' utilization of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties differed (Aarhus 49%, Aalborg 14%, and Copenhagen 22%, p < 0.001). 28 patients had revision surgery during the first year (hospital independent, p = 0.1) and were subsequently excluded. 1-year OKS (39 ± 7) was independent of hospital (p = 0.1), even when adjusted for age, sex, Body Mass Index, baseline OKS and osteoarthritis grading. 15% of patients improved less than Minimal Important Change (8 OKS) (Aarhus 19%, Aalborg 13% and Copenhagen 14%, p = 0.051 unadjusted). Patients with comparable preoperative OKS or osteoarthritis grading had similar 1-year results across hospitals (OKS and willingness to repeat surgery, p ≥ 0.087) except for the 64 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade-4 (Aarhus 4-6 OKS points lower). 86% of patients were satisfied, and 92% were "willing to repeat surgery", independent of hospital (p ≥ 0.1). Hospital revision rates differences diminished during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in hospitals with a history of differing revision rates had comparable patient-reported outcomes 1 year after primary knee arthroplasty, supporting that surgical quality should not be evaluated by revision rates alone. Future studies should explore if revision rate variations may depend as much on revision thresholds and indications as on outcomes of primary surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II (Prospective cohort study).

Hospital variation in revision rates after primary knee arthroplasty was not explained by patient selection: baseline data from 1452 patients in the Danish prospective multicenter cohort study, SPARK.

PURPOSE: Revision rates following primary knee arthroplasty vary by country, region and hospital. The SPARK study was initiated to compare primary surgery across three Danish regions with consistently different revision rates. The present study investigated whether the variations were associated with differences in the primary patient selection. METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study included patients scheduled Sep 2016 Dec 2017 for primary knee arthroplasty (total, medial/lateral unicompartmental or patellofemoral) at three high-volume hospitals, representing regions with 2-year cumulative revision rates of 1, 2 and 5%, respectively. Hospitals were compared with respects to patient demographics, preoperative patient-reported outcome measures, motivations for surgery, implant selection, radiological osteoarthritis and the regional incidence of primary surgery. Statistical tests (parametric and non-parametric) comprised all three hospitals. RESULTS: Baseline data was provided by 1452 patients (89% of included patients, 56% of available patients). Patients in Copenhagen (Herlev-Gentofte Hospital, high-revision) were older (68.6 ± 9 years) than those in low-revision hospitals (Aarhus 66.6 ± 10 y. and Aalborg (Farsø) 67.3 ± 9 y., p = 0.002). In Aalborg, patients who had higher Body Mass Index (mean 30.2 kg/m2 versus 28.2 (Aarhus) and 28.7 kg/m2 (Copenhagen), p < 0.001), were more likely to be male (56% versus 45 and 43%, respectively, p = 0.002), and exhibited fewer anxiety and depression symptoms (EQ-5D-5L) (24% versus 34 and 38%, p = 0.01). The preoperative Oxford Knee Score (23.3 ± 7), UCLA Activity Scale (4.7 ± 2), range of motion (Copenhagen Knee ROM Scale) and patient motivations were comparable across hospitals but varied with implant type. Radiological classification ≥ 2 was observed in 94% (Kellgren-Lawrence) and 67% (Ahlbäck) and was more frequent in Aarhus (low-revision) (p ≤ 0.02), where unicompartmental implants were utilized most (49% versus 14 (Aalborg) and 23% (Copenhagen), p < 0.001). In the Capital Region (Copenhagen), the incidence of surgery was 15-28% higher (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcome measures prior to primary knee arthroplasty were comparable across hospitals with differing revision rates. While radiographic classifications and surgical incidence indicated higher thresholds for primary surgery in one low-revision hospital, most variations in patient and implant selection were contrary to well-known revision risk factors, suggesting that patient selection differences alone were unlikely to be responsible for the observed variation in revision rates across Danish hospitals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, Prospective cohort study.

Primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for fractures requires more revisions than for degenerative conditions 1 year after surgery: an analysis from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.

BACKGROUND: Although reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is considered a viable treatment strategy for proximal humeral fractures, there is an ongoing discussion of how its revision rate compares with indications performed in the elective setting. First, this study evaluated whether RTSA for fractures conveyed a higher revision rate than RTSA for degenerative conditions (osteoarthritis, rotator cuff arthropathy, rotator cuff tear, or rheumatoid arthritis). Second, this study assessed whether there was a difference in patient-reported outcomes between these 2 groups following primary replacement. Finally, the results of conventional stem designs were compared with those of fracture-specific designs within the fracture group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative cohort study with registry data from the Netherlands, generated prospectively between 2014 and 2020. Patients (aged ≥ 18 years) were included if they underwent primary RTSA for a fracture (<4 weeks after trauma), osteoarthritis, rotator cuff arthropathy, rotator cuff tear, or rheumatoid arthritis, with follow-up until first revision, death, or the end of the study period. The primary outcome was the revision rate. The secondary outcomes were the Oxford Shoulder Score, EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) score, numerical rating scale score (pain at rest and during activity), recommendation score, and scores assessing change in daily functioning and change in pain. RESULTS: This study included 8753 patients in the degenerative condition group (mean age, 74.3 ± 7.2 years) and 2104 patients in the fracture group (mean age, 74.3 ± 7.8 years). RTSA performed for fractures showed an early steep decline in survivorship: Adjusted for time, age, sex, and arthroplasty brand, the revision risk after 1 year was significantly higher in these patients than in those with degenerative conditions (hazard ratio [HR], 2.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-3.77). Over time, the HR steadily decreased, with an HR of 0.98 at year 6. Apart from the recommendation score (which was slightly better within the fracture group), there were no clinically relevant differences in the patient-reported outcome measures after 12 months. Patients who received conventional stems (n = 1137) did not have a higher likelihood of undergoing a revision procedure than those who received fracture-specific stems (n = 675) (HR, 1.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-3.17). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing primary RTSA for fractures have a substantially higher likelihood of undergoing revision within the first year following the procedure than patients with degenerative conditions preoperatively. Although RTSA is regarded as a reliable and safe treatment option for fractures, surgeons should inform patients accordingly and incorporate this information in decision making when opting for head replacement surgery. There were no differences in patient-reported outcomes between the 2 groups and no differences in revision rates between conventional and fracture-specific stem designs.

Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) showed a lower risk of failure compared to medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the Register of Prosthetic Orthopedic Implants (RIPO).

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to investigate differences in survivorship between medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) by analyzing the data of an Italian regional registry. The hypothesis was that, according to recent literature, lateral implants have comparable survivorship with regard to the medial implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Register of Orthopaedic Prosthetic Implants (RIPO) of Emilia-Romagna (Italy) database was searched for all UKAs between July 1, 2000, and December 31, 2019. For both cohorts, subject demographics and reasons for revision were presented as a percentage of the total cohort. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using revision of any component as the endpoint and survival times of unrevised UKAs taken as the last observation date (December 31, 2019, or date of death). RESULTS: Patients living outside the region and symmetrical implants (which do not allow the compartment operated to be traced) were excluded. 5571 UKAs implanted on 5172 patients (5215 medial UKAs and 356 lateral UKAs) were included in the study. The survivorship analysis revealed 13 failures out of 356 lateral UKAs (3.7%) at a mean follow-up of 6.3 years and 495 failures out of 5215 medial UKAs (9.5%) at a mean follow-up of 6.7 years. The medial UKAs had a significantly higher risk of failure, with a Hazard Ratio of 2.6 (CI 95% 1.6-4.8; p < 0.001), adjusted for age, gender, weight, and mobility of the insert. Both the groups revealed a good survival rate, with 95.2% of lateral implants and 87.5% of medial implants still in situ at 10 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral UKA is a safe procedure showing longer survivorship than medial UKAs (95.2% and 87.5% at 10 years, respectively) in the present study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, therapeutic study.

Dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 55 years old: a systematic review.

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is regarded as one of the most successful and cost-effective orthopedic procedures. However, THA is a surgical procedure with potential intraoperative and postoperative risks. Dislocation is one of the common postoperative complications and remains one of the main indications for THA revision. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the role and the outcomes of dual-mobility implant to prevent dislocation in patients younger than < 55 years in primary THA. In this systematic review, we included observational, prospective, and retrospective studies that evaluated the outcome and the complications of the dual-mobility cup in < 55-year-old patients. After applying exclusion criteria (femoral neck fractures or THA revision, case series, reviews, and meta-analyses), ten articles were included in the study. The overall number of participants in all the studies was 1530. The mean age of the participants was 50 years. The mean follow-up was 11.7 years. A total of 46 patients (2.7%) reported intraprosthetic dislocations, in which the polyethylene liner dissociates from the femoral head, while 4.8% of revision was due to aseptic loosening. The mean revision rate at twelve years was 11%. The mean value of Harris Hip Score increased from 50.9 pre-operatively to 91.6 after surgery. Dual mobility is a valid option for young patients with extended survivorship and low rates of instability and dislocation after primary THA.

Delay of total joint replacement is associated with a higher 90-day revision rate and increased postoperative complications.

PURPOSE: Delay of elective surgeries, such as total joint replacement (TJR), is a common procedure in the current pandemic. In trauma surgery, postponement is associated with increased complication rates. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of postponement on surgical revision rates and postoperative complications after elective TJR. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 10,140 consecutive patients undergoing primary total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) between 2011 and 2020, the effect of surgical delay on 90-day surgical revision rate, as well as internal and surgical complication rates, was investigated in a university high-volume arthroplasty center using the institute's joint registry and data of the hospital administration. Moreover, multivariate logistic regression models were used to adjust for confounding variables. RESULTS: Two thousand four hundred and eighty TJRs patients were identified with a mean delay of 13.5 ± 29.6 days. Postponed TJR revealed a higher 90-day revision rate (7.1-4.5%, p < 0.001), surgical complications (3.2-1.9%, p < 0.001), internal complications (1.8-1.2% p < 0.041) and transfusion rate (2.6-1.8%, p < 0.023) than on-time TJR. Logistic regression analysis confirmed delay of TJRs as independent risk factor for 90-day revision rate [OR 1.42; 95% CI (1.18-1.72); p < 0.001] and surgical complication rates [OR 1.51; 95% CI (1.14-2.00); p = 0.04]. CONCLUSION: Alike trauma surgery, delay in elective primary TJR correlates with higher revision and complication rates. Therefore, scheduling should be performed under consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective cohort study.