All-cause Revision Research Articles

Two-stage revision for periprosthetic infection in shoulder arthroplasty: an institutional experience

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection involving shoulder arthroplasty is often treated with a 2-stage approach, involving resection and placement of an antibiotic cement spacer followed by staged reimplantation after eradication of the infection. While there are several studies examining the near-term clinical course and outcomes of this sequence, there is still ambiguity surrounding the diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection, including the nature of the infection as well as treatment failure rates, and we hypothesized that trends may be observed in an institutional cohort of periprosthetic shoulder arthroplasty infections. MethodsA retrospective review of all shoulder arthroplasty cases performed at a tertiary care health system between May 2013 and September 2021 was conducted, revealing 32 patients who underwent a 2-stage treatment for periprosthetic infection, including reimplantation. Cases were reviewed for basic demographic factors, preoperative inflammatory markers, intraoperative frozen specimens and cultured organisms, and antibiotic regimen. Inpatient length of stay, discharge location, and unplanned 90-day readmissions were recorded, as well as subsequent clinical course including further post-reimplantation revisions. ResultsAll 32 cases underwent reimplantation, with a median time of 3.3 months (14.3 weeks) between stages and a post-reimplantation median follow-up of 0.6 years (minimum 1 year: 40%). Twenty-four (75%) cases required no further revision surgery, and in no cases was there a recurrence of deep infection or repeat 2-stage treatment after reimplantation. Four patients subsequently underwent aseptic revision, 3 sustained a periprosthetic fracture, and 1 underwent an irrigation and débridement for superficial cellulitis. At spacer placement, 17 cases (57%) were culture-negative infections, while 6 cases (20%) grew Cutibacterium acnes. Intraoperative frozen sections were taken in 17 cases, but only 3 (18%) were positive for acute inflammation. ConclusionTwo-stage treatment for periprosthetic infection in shoulder arthroplasty appears to have a high efficacy in preventing recurrence of deep infection, but patients should be counseled regarding its high all-cause revision rate following reimplantation. Further, many infections can be culture-negative with no intraoperative evidence of acute inflammation.

Mid-term survivorship of fixed bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty with no exclusion of early PFJ arthritis or ACL deficiency: Analysis of clinical and radiological predictors.

Fixed bearing (FB) UKA constituted 63.7% of unicondylar knee arthroplasties in 2020 Australian Registry with the longest UKA survivorship. The significance of patellofemoral joint (PFJ) arthritis, ACL deficiency, post-operative anteromedial pain, radiosclerosis or radiolucency on survivorship of FB UKA is not established. The aim of this study was to analyze the medium-term survivorship of fixed-bearing UKA with no exclusion of PFJ OA and ACL deficiency. Predictors for failure were analyzed. FB UKA performed in 2011-17 were reviewed. Cases with PFJ OA or ACL deficiency were not excluded. The effect on survivorship by ACL deficiency, PFJ arthritis, post-operative anteromedial pain and radiological abnormalities were analyzed. There were 96 UKA with follow-up time of 66 ± 18months (27-98). The mean age was 70 ± 9years, BMI 25.8 ± 2.6kg/m2. Alignment was varus 9° ± 4° pre-operatively and varus 3° ± 3° post-operatively. There were four revisions (4.2%) and 4 deaths (4.2%). Reasons for revisions were loosening (n = 1), persistent pain (n = 2) and lateral compartment disease (n = 1). Estimated survival at 8.3years was 94.7% (95% CI 91.6-97.7). BMI ≥30 was found to be a significant predictor for failure. The incidence of radiographic abnormalities was 75% for PFJ arthritis, 39% for tibial tray overhang, 14% for radiolucency or radiosclerosis, 5% for ACL deficiency and 5% for edge loading respectively but they were not significantly associated with lower survivorship or anteromedial knee pain. The presence of anteromedial pain after surgery in 36.5% was also not significantly associated with survivorship. FB UKA with no exclusion of early PFJ arthritis and ACL deficiency has satisfactory medium-term survivorship. BMI ≥30 could have higher risk of all-cause revision. Tibial tray overhang, non-progressive radiolucency or radiosclerosis do not seem to be associated with anteromedial knee pain or poorer medium term survivorship.

No Reduction in Revision Risk Associated With Highly Cross-linked Polyethylene With or Without Antioxidants Over Conventional Polyetheylene in TKA: An Analysis From the American Joint Replacement Registry.

Highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) can improve wear properties in TKA, but it can also lead to decreased mechanical properties. Antioxidants were added to HXLPE to improve its mechanical properties while retaining the improved wear characteristics. However, it remains unclear whether these modifications to conventional polytheylene used in TKA have resulted in a change in the revision risk. We used American Joint Replacement Registry data to ask: (1) Is there a difference in all-cause revision in patients who underwent TKA using HXLPE with or without an antioxidant doping compared with conventional polyethylene? (2) Is there a difference in revision for aseptic failure in patients who underwent TKA using HXLPE with or without an antioxidant doping compared with conventional polyethylene? We analyzed American Joint Replacement Registry data from 2012 to 2019. We identified 339,366 primary TKAs over the study period in patients older than 65 years and linked procedures to supplemental Centers for Medicare & Medicaid data where available. Patient total number of reported comorbidities, gender, age, region, polyethylene characteristics, procedure dates, and indication for revision were recorded. Median follow-up was 34 months. We compared HXLPE with or without antioxidants to conventional polyethylene. Event-free percent survival curves and Cox proportional hazard regression modeling was used for all-cause revision and revision for aseptic failure. Compared with conventional polyethylene, there was no difference in all-cause revision with HXLPE with an antioxidant (HR 1.06 [95% CI 0.98 to 1.14]; p = 0.13) or HXLPE without an antioxidant (HR 1.04 [95% CI 0.97 to 1.11]; p = 0.28). Compared with conventional polyethylene, there was no difference in revision for aseptic failure with HXLPE with an antioxidant (HR 1.07 [95% CI 0.99 to 1.14]; p = 0.08) or HXLPE without an antioxidant (HR 1.03 [95% CI 0.97 to 1.01]; p = 0.30). We found no difference in revision risk between HXLPE with or without an antioxidant and conventional polyethylene during this time frame. HXLPE polyethylene, with or without an antioxidant, should not be widely adopted until or unless it is shown to be superior to conventional polyethylene in TKA. Level III, therapeutic study.

What Is the Long-term Survivorship of Primary and Revision Cemented Distal Femoral Replacements for Limb Salvage of Patients With Sarcoma?

What Is the Long-term Survivorship of Primary and Revision Cemented Distal Femoral Replacements for Limb Salvage of Patients With Sarcoma?

Third and fourth generation ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years

BackgroundCeramic on Ceramic bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) afford a low friction coefficient, low wear rates and extreme hardness. Significant complications include hip squeak, ceramic fracture and poor polyethylene performance in revision procedures due to imbedding of abrasive microscopic ceramic fragments. We report on the results of this bearing at a minimum of 10 years. MethodsA single-centre retrospective review of 449 THAs was performed. Primary outcome measures included aseptic revision and all-cause revision rates at a minimum of 10 years post operatively. Evaluation of functionality was performed with WOMAC and SF-36 scores which were performed pre-operatively and at intervals of 6 months, one year, 2 years, 5 years and 10 years post operatively. ResultsThere was a 6.2% (n = 28) all-cause and 5.3% (n = 24) aseptic revision rate for ceramic on ceramic total hip arthroplasty at minimum of 10 years with a mean time to revision 4.8 years (range 2 months–11.6 years). Notably, there were 2 revisions for ceramic head fracture, one for ceramic liner fracture, 3 for aseptic loosening and 3 revisions for squeaking. Pain of unknown origin was the most common reason for revision. There was an improvement in postoperative WOMAC scores from a mean of 59.8 (range 15–95) pre-operatively to a mean of 15.6 (range 0–78) at 10 years. ConclusionThis study showed good functional outcomes but high revision rates for CoC THA at a minimum of 10 years. Our rates of ceramic fracture were consistent with other studies.

Impact of patient and prosthesis characteristics on common reasons for total knee replacement revision: a registry study of 36,626 revision cases from Australia, Sweden, and USA.

Background and purposeTotal knee replacement (TKR) studies usually analyze all-cause revision when considering relationships with patient and prosthesis factors. We studied how these factors impact different revision diagnoses.Patients and methodsWe used data from 2003 to 2019 of TKR for osteoarthritis from the arthroplasty registries of Sweden, Australia, and Kaiser Permanente, USA to study patient and prosthesis characteristics for specific revision diagnoses. There were 1,072,924 primary TKR included and 36,626 were revised. Factors studied included age, sex, prosthesis constraint, fixation method, bearing mobility, polyethylene type, and patellar component use. Revision diagnoses were arthrofibrosis, fracture, infection, instability, loosening, pain, patellar reasons, and wear. Odds ratios (ORs) for revision were estimated and summary effects were calculated using a meta-analytic approach.ResultsWe found between-registry consistency in 15 factor/reason analyses. Risk factors for revision for arthrofibrosis were age < 65 years (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.4–2.7) and mobile bearing designs (MB) (OR 1.7; CI 1.1–2.5), for fracture were female sex (OR 3.2; CI 2.2–4.8), age ≥ 65 years (OR 2.8; CI 1.9–4) and posterior stabilized prostheses (PS) (OR 2.1; CI 1.3–3.5), for infection were male sex (OR 1.9; CI 1.7–2.0) and PS (OR 1.5; CI 1.2–1.8), for instability were age < 65 years (OR 1.5; CI 1.3–1.8) and MB (OR 1.5; CI 1.1–2.2), for loosening were PS (OR 1.5; CI 1.4–1.6), MB (OR 2.2; CI 1.6–3.0) and use of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (OR 2.3; CI 1.8–2.9), for patellar reasons were not resurfacing the patella (OR 13.6; CI 2.1–87.2) and MB (OR 2.0; CI 1.2–3.3) and for wear was cementless fixation (OR 4.9; CI 4.3–5.5).InterpretationPatients could be counselled regarding specific age and sex risks. Use of minimally stabilized, fixed bearing, cemented prostheses, and patellar components is encouraged to minimize revision risk.

Collarless Taper Slip and Collared Composite Beam Stems Differ in Failure Modes and Reoperation Rates

Cemented femoral components are used in older patients based on lower risk of periprosthetic fracture and implant loosening. This study reports the survivorship free of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFX), femoral loosening, all-cause revision, and reoperation between 2 philosophies of cemented stems. In total, 1,306 primary hybrid total hip arthroplasties were performed for osteoarthritis between 2000 and 2018 in a retrospective single center study. Cemented stems included 798 EON composite beam (CB) and 508 Exeter collarless taper slip (CTS) stems. Mean age was 77 years. An inverse treated probability weighted model was utilized to control for risk factors including age, gender, body mass index, year, and surgeon. There was no difference in risk of PPFX at 10 years (CTS 9% vs CB 5%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.4, P= .47). There was an increased risk of intraoperative fractures requiring fixation in the CB cohort (7/798 [5 calcar, 2 greater trochanter] vs 0/508, P < .001), while there was an increased risk of Vancouver B2 PPFX in the CTS cohort (7/508 vs 0/798; P < 001). There was a higher risk of femoral loosening in the CB cohort (6/798 vs 0/508; P < .0001). Higher survivorship free of revision (98% vs 91%; HR 4, P= .001) and free of reoperation (96% vs 88%; HR 2.5, P= .002) was seen at 10 years in the CB cohort. The risk of PPFX requiring implant revision was increased in the CTS cohort, while there was an increased risk of femoral component loosening and intraoperative fractures seen in the CB cohort. Surgeons should be aware of the different failure modes when choosing implant design for their patient.

Revision Risk for Total Knee Arthroplasty Polyethylene Designs in Patients 65 Years of Age or Older: An Analysis from the American Joint Replacement Registry.

Polyethylene bearing design may influence the risk of revision after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Previous investigations from outside of the United States have suggested the potential for an increased risk of all-cause revision and revision for infection with the use of posterior-stabilized bearings. We examine the risk of revision based on the polyethylene bearing design selection for primary TKA. An analysis of the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) data from 2012 to 2019 was performed. We identified all primary TKAs over the study period and linked cases to supplemental U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data where available. Patient demographic characteristics, polyethylene characteristics, procedure dates, and cause for revision were recorded. Analysis was performed to compare minimally stabilized implants (cruciate-retaining, anterior-stabilized, or pivot bearing designs) with posterior-stabilized implants. Cumulative incidence function (CIF) curves and Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) were created for all-cause revision and revision for infection in each group. We identified 305,279 cases with reported minimally stabilized or posterior-stabilized implant characteristics. There were 161,486 cases (52.9%) that utilized posterior-stabilized bearings compared with 143,793 cases (47.1%) with minimally stabilized bearings. For minimally stabilized bearings, 1,693 cases (1.18%) had all-cause revision and 334 cases (0.23%) had revision for infection. For posterior-stabilized bearings, 2,406 cases (1.49%) had all-cause revision and 446 cases (0.28%) had revision for infection. The use of posterior-stabilized bearings had HRs of 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 to 1.3; p < 0.0001) for all-cause revision and 1.18 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.4; p = 0.02) for revision for infection. Similar to investigations from international registries, we found an increased risk of all-cause revision and revision for infection when using posterior-stabilized bearings in TKA in the United States. Surgeons should consider this finding when considering bearing selection for primary TKA. Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Spinal Compared with General Anesthesia in Contemporary Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties.

The specific advantages of spinal anesthesia compared with general anesthesia for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the pain control, length of stay, and postoperative outcomes associated with spinal anesthesia compared with general anesthesia in a large cohort of primary THAs from a single, high-volume academic institution. We retrospectively identified 13,730 primary THAs (11,319 patients) from 2001 to 2016 using our total joint registry. Of these cases, 58% had general anesthesia and 42% had spinal anesthesia. The demographic characteristics were similar between groups, with mean age of 64 years, 51% female, and mean body mass index (BMI) of 31 kg/m 2 . Data were analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted model based on a propensity score that accounted for numerous patient and operative factors. The mean follow-up was 6 years. Patients treated with spinal anesthesia had lower Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) scores (p < 0.001) and required fewer postoperative oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) at all time points evaluated (p < 0.001). Patients treated with spinal anesthesia also had shorter hospital length of stay (p = 0.02), fewer altered mental status events (odds ratio [OR], 0.7; p = 0.02), and fewer intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (OR, 0.7; p = 0.01). There was no difference in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (p = 0.8), pulmonary embolism (p = 0.4), 30-day readmissions (p = 0.17), 90-day readmissions (p = 0.18), all-cause revisions (p = 0.17), or all-cause reoperations (p = 0.14). In this large, single-institution study, we found that spinal anesthesia was associated with reduced pain scores and OME use postoperatively. Furthermore, spinal anesthesia resulted in fewer altered mental status events and ICU admissions. These data favor the use of spinal anesthesia in primary THAs. Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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

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. 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? 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. 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. 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 III, therapeutic study.

A Prospective, Longitudinal Study of the Influence of Obesity on Total Knee Arthroplasty Revision Rate: Results from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship of obesity with all-cause revision and revision for infection, loosening, instability, and pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed in Australia. Data for patients undergoing primary TKA for osteoarthritis from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, were obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR). The rates of all-cause revision and revision for infection, loosening, instability, and pain were compared for non-obese patients (body mass index [BMI], 18.50 to 29.99 kg/m 2 ), class-I and II obese patients (BMI, 30.00 to 39.99 kg/m 2 ), and class-III obese patients (BMI, ≥40.00 kg/m 2 ). The results were adjusted for age, sex, tibial fixation, prosthesis stability, patellar component usage, and computer navigation usage. During the study period, 141,673 patients underwent primary TKA for osteoarthritis in Australia; of these patients, 48.0% were class-I or II obese, and 10.6% were class-III obese. The mean age was 68.2 years, and 54.7% of patients were female. The mean follow-up period was 2.8 years. Of the 2,655 revision procedures identified, the reasons for the procedures included infection in 39.7%, loosening in 14.8%, instability in 12.0%, and pain in 6.1%. Class-I and II obese patients had a higher risk of all-cause revision (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03 to 1.22]; p = 0.007) and revision for infection (HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.43]; p = 0.001) than non-obese patients. Class-III obese patients had a higher risk of all-cause revision after 1 year (HR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.14 to 1.52]; p < 0.001), revision for infection after 3 months (HR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.33 to 2.17]; p < 0.001), and revision for loosening (HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.89]; p = 0.047) than non-obese patients. The risks of revision for instability and pain were similar among groups. Obese patients with knee osteoarthritis should be counseled with regard to the increased risks associated with TKA, so they can make informed decisions about their health care. Health services and policymakers need to address the issue of obesity at a population level. Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Long Term Results of Two-Stage Revision for Chronic Periprosthetic Knee Infection: A Multicenter Study.

Long-term reinfection and mortality rates and clinical outcomes with sufficient subject numbers remain limited for patients undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic knee infections. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term reinfection, complication, and mortality following reimplantation for two-stage exchange following knee arthroplasty. Retrospective review of 178 patients who underwent two-stage exchange knee arthroplasty for chronic PJI at three large tertiary referral institutions with an average of 6.63-year follow-up from reimplantation from 1990 to 2015. Rates of reinfection, mortality, and all-cause revision were calculated along with the cumulative incidence of reinfection with death as a competing factor. Risk factors for reinfection were determined using Cox multivariate regression analysis. Overall rate of infection eradication was 85.41%, with a mortality rate of 30.33%. Patients with minimum 5-year follow-up (n= 118, average 8.32 years) had an infection eradication rate of 88.98%, with a mortality rate of 33.05%. This is a large series with long-term follow-up evaluating outcomes of two-stage exchange knee arthroplasty resulting in adequate infection eradication and high mortality. Results were maintained at longer follow-up. This technique should be considered in patients with chronic PJI; however, realistic expectations regarding long-term outcomes must be discussed with patients.

Imageless Computer Navigation Reduces 5-Year All-Cause Revision Rates After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

The use of surgical navigation has been shown to reduce revision rates after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients <65 years of age. It is unknown if this benefit extends to older patients. We hypothesized that the use of surgical navigation would reduce rates of all-cause revision in patients of all ages. In this cohort study, we queried the Truven MarketScan all-payer database to identify patients who underwent TKA from 2007 to 2015. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to create 2 groups based on whether intraoperative navigation was used. Demographics, comorbidities, complications, and revision rates were determined. International Classification of Diseases codes were used to determine reasons for revision. The conventional TKA cohort included 312,173 patients. The navigation cohort included 20,881 patients. There were not any clinically significant differences in demographics between the cohorts. All-cause revision rates were lower in the navigation cohort at 1 year (0.4% vs 0.5%, P= .04), 2 years (0.7% vs 0.9%, P= .003), and 5 years (0.9% vs 1.3%, P < .001) of follow-up. Revisions for mechanical loosening were more common in the conventional cohort (30.8% vs 21.9%, P= .009). Rates of revision for other causes, including infection, did not differ between groups, with the numbers available. The use of surgical navigation yielded a 30.7% reduction in the all-cause revision rate at 5-year follow-up compared to conventional TKA. This benefit increased as follow-up duration increased. Increased usage of this inexpensive technology, from the current 6.3% in this US cohort, may reduce healthcare costs. III.

High rate of tibial debonding and failure in a popular knee replacement : a follow-up review.

AimsTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common and safe orthopaedic procedure. Zimmer Biomet's NexGen is the second most popular brand of implant used in the UK. The primary cause of revision after the first year is aseptic loosening. We present our experience of using this implant, with significant concerns around its performance with regards early aseptic loosening of the tibial component.MethodsA retrospective, single-surgeon review was carried out of all of the NexGen Legacy Posterior Stabilized (LPS) TKAs performed in this institute. The specific model used for the index procedures was the NexGen Complete Knee System (Legacy Knee-Posterior Stabilized LPS-Flex Articular Surface, LPS-Flex Femoral Component Option, and Stemmed Nonaugmentable Tibial Component Option).ResultsBetween 2013 and 2016, 352 NexGen TKAs were carried out on 331 patients. A total of 62 TKAs have been revised to date, giving an all-cause revision rate of 17.6% at a minimum of five years. Three of these revisions were due to infection. Overall, 59 of the revisions were performed for aseptic loosening (16.7%) of the tibial component. The tibial component was removed intraoperatively without instrumentation due to significant tibial debonding between the implant-cement interface.ConclusionWhile overall, we believe that early aseptic loosening is multi-factorial in nature, the significantly high aseptic revision rate, as seen by an experienced fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeon, has led us to believe that there is a fundamental issue with this NexGen implant design. Continued implant surveillance and rigorous review across all regions using this particular implant is warranted based on the concerning findings described here.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(6):495–501.

Revision Risk of Total Hip Arthroplasty With Vitamin E Doped Liners: Results From the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register

Vitamin E-doped cross-linked polyethylene (VEPE) liners were introduced in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to reduce wear and risk of aseptic loosening and liner fracture. We report this nationwide population-based study to investigate the safety of VEPE liners for THA compared to cross-linked annealed or remelted polyethylene (XLPE). We included THAs from The Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2019, with uncemented cup, VEPE or XLPE liner, and metal or ceramic head. The outcome was revision due to (1) polyethylene-related endpoints (aseptic loosening, granuloma, osteolysis, or liner fractures) and (2) other endpoints. A total of 110,803 THAs were assessed for eligibility and 53,842 THAs (46,645 patients) were included in the study: 5069 (9.4%) THAs with a VEPE liner and 48,773 (91.6%) with a XLPE liner. Median observation time was 5.48 (interquartile range 3.80-7.15) years for VEPE and 4.85 (interquartile range 2.68-7.76) for XLPE. VEPE had a lower risk of revision for polyethylene-related endpoints compared to XLPE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.36-0.98) during complete follow-up. THAs with VEPE liners were associated with increased risk of any revision within the first 3 months (HR 1.62, 1.36-1.94), revision recorded as aseptic loosening within 3 months (HR 4.46, 2.26-8.80), and periprosthetic fracture within 3 months (HR 2.57, 1.98, 3.33). VEPE liners had a lower risk of revision due to polyethylene-related endpoints, but a higher risk of all-cause revision within 3 months.

Does Body Mass Index Influence the Outcomes and Survivorship of Modern Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BackgroundHigher body mass index (BMI) has been associated with higher rates of aseptic loosening following cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there is a paucity of evidence on the effect of BMI on the durability of modern cementless TKA. We aimed to assess the association between BMI and clinical outcomes following cementless TKA and to determine if there was a BMI threshold beyond which the risk of revision significantly increased. MethodsWe identified 1,408 cementless TKAs of a modern design from an institutional registry. Patients were classified into BMI categories: normal (n = 136), overweight (n = 476), obese class I (n = 423), II (n = 258), and III (n = 115). The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and 12-item Short Form Health Survey scores were collected preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Survivorship was recorded at minimum 2 years (range, 24 to 88 months). BMI was analyzed as a continuous and categorical variable. ResultsThe improvement in patient-reported outcomes was similar across the groups. Thirty four knees (2.4%) were revised and 14 (1.0%) were for aseptic failure. Mean time-to-revision was 1.2 ± 1.3 years and did not differ across BMI categories (P = .455). Survivorship free from all-cause and aseptic revision was 97.1% and 99.0% at mean 4 years, respectively. Using Cox regression to control for demographics and bilateral procedures, BMI had no association with all-cause revision (P = .612) or aseptic revision (P = .186). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis found no relationship between BMI and revision risk (c-statistic = 0.51). ConclusionBMI did not influence functional outcomes and survivorship of modern cementless TKA, possibly due to improved biological fixation at the bone-implant interface. Longer follow-up is necessary to confirm these findings.

Mid-term outcomes of the Wagner Cone Prosthesis™ stem for developmental dysplasia of the hip: minimum twoyear follow-up.

Treatment of symptomatic developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) requires a technically demanding total hip arthroplasty (THA) reconstruction. In patients with DDH, prostheses can be difficult to implant and often face the risk of fracture, mismatch, and loosening. The Wagner Cone Prosthesis™ is a tapered, conical stem which can improve treatment success in this population. We look at midterm survivorship and outcomes of THA for DDH using the Wagner Cone Prosthesis™. We retrospectively analyzed 28 patients (33 hips) with DDH undergoing THA using the Wagner Cone Prosthesis™ between January 2008 and January 2020. Ten, nine, and fourteen included patients were classified as Hartofilakidis A, B, and C, respectively. Survivorship according to Kaplan-Meier analysis was the primary outcome, with re-operation and revision as endpoints. The Oxford hip score (OHS) was used to assess clinical outcome. We used multivariate analysis to determine predictors of poor outcomes. The average follow-up was 4.6years, with a minimum of twoyears. Kaplan-Meier survivorship over the 13-year study period was 93.9 ± 4.2% for all-cause revision as an endpoint and 96.9 ± 3.1% for stem revisions only. The overall reoperation rate was 6.1%, with periprosthetic fracture and dislocation being reasons for re-operation. No patients were revised for aseptic loosening, and no patients were revised for subsidence. OHS improved from 19.3 ± 9.6 (4-39) pre-operatively to 37.6 ± 8.4 (19-48) at latest follow-up (p < 0.05). In patients with DDH, THA with the Wagner Cone Prosthesis™ demonstrates excellent clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported functional outcomes at midterm follow-up.

Retrospective comparison of rates of aseptic loosening in fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) implants

Background: A prominent cause for failure and revision in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is aseptic implant loosening. This study compared the revision rates for aseptic loosening of a new UKA implant, Aesculap Univation X (B. Braun, Tuttlingen, Germany), versus a well-established standard design, Miller Galante (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana). Methods: Patient charts were retrospectively reviewed of medial UKAs performed using two different fixed-bearing UKA implants from different manufacturers between January 1, 2002, and November 6, 2020. Of 308 patients included in the study, 44 had the new implant (AUK) and 264 patients had a standard implant (ZUK). The revision rates for all-cause and aseptic loosening were compared. The Kaplan Meier curve for 5-year survival rate was calculated based on aseptic loosening as the cause of failure. Hazard ratios for failure were calculated with multivariable Cox regression analysis. Results: All-cause revision and revision from aseptic loosening were significantly higher for AUK versus ZUK (20% versus 5.30% and 18.18% versus 3.41%, respectively). The log-rank test showed significantly longer survival for ZUK versus AUK group (P&lt;0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis found a hazard ratio of 21.62 (95% CI: 4.07, 114.72; P&lt;0.001) for revision for the AUK versus ZUK group, controlling for sex, age, and body mass index. Conclusions: Among these patients, AUK had lower survivorship than the established implant, ZUK, due to significantly higher hazard of all-cause revision and revision from aseptic loosening. These findings suggest a need for caution with use of this new implant. Level of Evidence: Level III.

No Difference in Revision Rate Between Low Viscosity and High Viscosity Cement Used in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundLoosening remains one of the most common reasons for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Cement viscosity has a potential role in reducing revision rates for loosening. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome for loosening of the 5 most used cemented knee prostheses by constraint type, based on the cement viscosity type used. MethodsThere were 214,708 TKA procedures performed between 1999 and 2020 for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis using the 5 most commonly used minimally stabilized, posterior stabilized, and medial pivot design cemented tibial components. Only procedures with a cemented tibial component were included. Outcomes for two different cement viscosities, 140,060 high viscosity and 74,648 low viscosity cement, were compared for each fixation type within each of the three stability groups. ResultsThere was no difference in a risk of all-cause revision when high viscosity cement was used compared to low viscosity cement for minimally stabilized prostheses (hazards ratio [HR] 1.07 [95% CI 0.99-1.15], P = .09), posterior stabilized prostheses (HR 1.03 [95% CI 0.95-1.11], P = .53), and medial pivot design prostheses (HR 1.06 [95% CI 0.80-1.41], P = .67). No difference was observed between cement viscosity types for any of the prosthesis constraint types when aseptic loosening was assessed. ConclusionsWe found no difference in the risk of revision for any reason, or for loosening, with cement viscosity for the most commonly used minimally stabilized, posterior stabilized, and medial pivot TKA. The role of cement viscosity in the risk of TKA revision remains unclear and further research is required. Level of EvidenceLevel III Retrospective comparative study.

Risk of revision based on timing of corticosteroid injection prior to shoulder arthroplasty.

Corticosteroid injections are often used to manage glenohumeral arthritis in patients who may be candidates for future total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). In the conservative management of these patients, corticosteroid injections are often provided for symptomatic relief. The purpose of this study was to determine if the timing of corticosteroid injections prior to TSA or rTSA is associated with changes in rates of revision and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following these procedures. Data were collected from a national insurance database from January 2006 to December 2017. Patients who underwent shoulder corticosteroid injection within one year prior to ipsilateral TSA or rTSA were identified and stratified into the following cohorts: < three months, three to six months, six to nine months, and nine to 12 months from time of corticosteroid injection to TSA or rTSA. A control cohort with no corticosteroid injection within one year prior to TSA or rTSA was used for comparison. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the association between specific time intervals and outcomes. In total, 4,252 patients were included in this study. Among those, 1,632 patients (38.4%) received corticosteroid injection(s) within one year prior to TSA or rTSA and 2,620 patients (61.6%) did not. On multivariate analysis, patients who received corticosteroid injection < three months prior to TSA or rTSA were at significantly increased risk for revision (odds ratio (OR) 2.61 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.77 to 3.28); p < 0.001) when compared with the control cohort. However, there was no significant increase in revision risk for all other timing interval cohorts. Notably, Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3 was a significant independent risk factor for all-cause revision (OR 4.00 (95% CI 1.40 to 8.92); p = 0.036). There is a time-dependent relationship between the preoperative timing of corticosteroid injection and the incidence of all-cause revision surgery following TSA or rTSA. This analysis suggests that an interval of at least three months should be maintained between corticosteroid injection and TSA or rTSA to minimize risks of subsequent revision surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J2022;104-B(5):620-626.