Greater Risk Of Revision Research Articles

Good Mid-Term Implant Survival of a Novel Single-Design Rotating-Hinge Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Rotating-hinge knee (RHK) implants are an option for knee arthroplasty in cases of instability or severe bone loss. However, the revision rate can be increased compared to unconstrained implants which mandate improvements in implant design. This study investigates a novel RHK design for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Retrospective analysis of a single design RHK TKA (GenuX MK, Implantcast) implanted between 2015 and 2019 including 133 patients (21 primary TKA, 112 revisions). The main indication for revision TKA was second-stage reimplantation following infection. The median follow-up amounted to 30 months (IQR 22-47). In total, 13% (18/133) of patients underwent revision surgery after a mean time of 1 month (IQR 0-6). The main reason for the revision was (re-) infection in 8% of patients. All revisions were performed following revision TKA and none following primary TKA. There were no revision surgeries for loosening or instability. The revision-free implant survival of 83% was (95% CI 75-91%) after five years. A higher number of previous surgeries was associated with a greater revision risk (p = 0.05). Revision and complex primary TKA using a single-design RHK implant results in good implant survival at mid-term follow-up although infection remains a major concern.

Influence of Hospital Volume of Procedures by Year on the Risk of Revision of Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasties: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

The volume of total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasties (TKA) performed in a hospital per year could be an influential factor on the revision of these procedures. The aims of this study were: To obtain comparable cohorts in higher- and lower-volume hospitals; and to assess the association between the hospital volume and the incidence of revision. Data from patients undergoing THA and TKA caused by osteoarthritis and recorded in the Catalan Arthroplasty Register (RACat) between January 2005 and December 2016 were used. The main explanatory variable was hospital volume by year (higher/lower). The cut-off point was fixed, based on previous research, at 50 THA and 125 TKA procedures/year. To obtain comparable populations, a propensity-score matching method (1:1) was used. Patient characteristics prior to and after matching were compared. To assess differences by volume, subhazard ratios (SHRs) from competing risks models were obtained. After matching, 13,772 THA and 36,316 TKA patients remained in the study. Prior to matching, in both joints, significant differences in all confounders were observed between volume groups. After matching, none of them remained significant. Both in THA and TKA, a higher risk of revision in higher-volume hospitals was observed (THA SHR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.02–1.53; and TKA SHR: 1.29, 95%CI: 1.16–1.44). Unlike other contexts, currently in Catalonia, higher-volume hospitals have a greater risk of revision than lower-volume hospitals. Further research could be valuable to define context-dependent measures to reduce the incidence of revision.

ASA class is associated with early revision and reoperation after total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of the Geneva and Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registries

Background and purpose — Data from several joint replacement registries suggest that the rate of early revision surgery after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasing. The ASA class, now widely recorded in arthroplasty registries, may predict early revision. We investigated the influence of ASA class on the risk of revision and other reoperation within 3 months and within 5 years of primary THA.Patients and methods — We used data from the Geneva and Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registries, on primary elective THAs performed in 1996–2016 and 2008–2016, respectively. 5,319 and 122,241 THAs were included, respectively. Outcomes were all-cause revision and other reoperations evaluated using Kaplan–Meier survival and Cox regression analyses.Results — Within 3 months after surgery, higher ASA class was associated with greater risk of revision and other reoperation. 3-month cumulative incidences of revision by ASA class I, II, and III–IV respectively, were 0.6%, 0.7%, and 2.3% in Geneva and 0.5%, 0.8%, and 1.6% in Sweden. 3-month cumulative incidences of other reoperation were 0.4%, 0.7%, and 0.9% in Geneva and 0.2%, 0.4%, and 0.7% in Sweden. Adjusted hazard ratios (ASA III–IV vs. I) for revision within 3 months were 2.7 (95% CI 1.2–5.9) in Geneva and 3.3 (CI 2.6–4.0) in Sweden.Interpretation — Assessment of ASA class of patients prior to THA will facilitate risk stratification. Targeted risk-reduction strategies may be appropriate during the very early postoperative period for patients identified as at higher risk. Systematically recording ASA class in arthroplasty registries will permit risk adjustment and facilitate comparison of revision rates internationally.

Comparison of Return to Pre-Injury Sport After 10 mm Size Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone (BPTB) versus 8 mm Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Study with a Two-Year Follow-Up

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the reconstruction of a torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) with 10 mm diameter BPTB (bone-patellar tendon-bone) autograft versus 8 mm HT (hamstring tendon) autografts, to compare the ability to restore pre-injury sports activities and reduce revision risk after these procedures.Material/MethodsA prospective clinical review was performed to compare results of patients who underwent primary anatomical ACLR with 10 mm BPTB autografts with patients who underwent 8 mm diameter HT autografts, between January 2011 and January 2014.ResultsThere were 183 patients evaluated: the 8 mm HT group showed statistically significant higher knee laxity values compared to the 10 mm BPTB group (p=0.042), and significant difference were detected in subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) evaluation scores; the average subjective IKDC evaluations after two-year follow-up in the HT group was 88.45±2.8 versus 89.24±2.5 in BPTB group (p=0.047). In the evaluation of the IKDC objective protocol, results were excellent and good in 83 patients (94.3%) after BPTB and in 78 patients (82%) after HT ACLR (p<0.05). The average score on the Tegner activity scale in the HT group decreased from 6.5 at pre-injury to 5.8 at two-year follow-up (p<0.001) and from 6.7 at pre-injury to 6.5 at two-year follow-up in the BPTB group (p=0.4). The ability to restore pre-injury sports activities was higher in the BPTB group (6.5) versus the HT group (5.8) (p<0.001). Revision was required for two patients (2.2%) in the BPTB group compared with 14 patients (14.7%) in the HT group (p<0.05).ConclusionsSmaller HT graft size was a predictor of higher knee laxity and greater revision risk at two-year post primary ACL reconstruction. Larger diameter BPTB ACL grafts had a better ability to restore knee stability and greater ability to restore pre-injury sports activities.

CORR Insights(®): Are Females at Greater Risk for Revision Surgery After Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty With the Articular Surface Replacement Prosthesis?

Background Female patients undergoing hip resurfacing arthroplasties may be at greater risk of revision surgery than males, but it is unclear whether this is related to sex or other factors. We focused our analysis on data from a prospective multicenter cohort study monitoring the ASRTM hip resurfacing arthroplasty prosthesis on the potential association of sex on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), metal ion levels, revision surgery, and presence of adverse local tissue reaction. As thousands of patients with the ASRTM prosthesis are still undergoing followup it is critical to optimize the protocol for monitoring these patients.

Minor foot amputations in diabetic foot syndrome

The treatment strategy for diabetic foot syndrome must take into account protective sensibility of the foot, open wounds, infection status, and the rules of septic bone surgery. Interventions are classified as elective, prophylactic, curative, or emergency. Amputations in the forefoot and midfoot region are performed as ray amputations (including metatarsal), which can often be carried out as "inner" amputations. Gentle tissue treatment mandatory because of greater risk of revision with re-amputation compared to classical amputation. Good demarcation of infection, acute osteomyelitis, osteolytic lesions, neurotropic ulcer, arterial and venous blood flow to the other toes, gangrene of other toes with metatarsal affection. Arterial occlusive disease, infection of neighboring areas, avoidable amputations, poorly healing ulcers on the lower leg. Primary dorsal approach; minimal incisional distance (5cm) to minimize skin necrosis risk. Atraumatic preparation, minimize hemostasis to not compromise the borderline perfusion situation. In amputations, plantar skin preparation and longer seams placed as dorsal as possible, either disarticulated and maintain cartilage, or round the cortical metatarsal bone after resection. Diabetes control. Braun splint, mobilization in a shoe with forefoot decompression and hindfoot support, physiotherapy. Antibiotics based on resistance testing. If no complications, dressing change on postoperative day1. Optimal wound drainage by lowering foot several times a day; drainage removal after 12-24h. Insoles and footwear optimization. Amputations require continued attention and if necessary treatment to avoid sequelae. Insufficient treatment associated with recurrent ulceration and altered anatomy.

Experimental and Numerical Models of Complex Clinical Scenarios; Strategies to Improve Relevance and Reproducibility of Joint Replacement Research.

This research review aims to focus attention on the effect of specific surgical and host factors on implant fixation, and the importance of accounting for them in experimental and numerical models. These factors affect (a) eventual clinical applicability and (b) reproducibility of findings across research groups. Proper function and longevity for orthopedic joint replacement implants relies on secure fixation to the surrounding bone. Technology and surgical technique has improved over the last 50 years, and robust ingrowth and decades of implant survival is now routinely achieved for healthy patients and first-time (primary) implantation. Second-time (revision) implantation presents with bone loss with interfacial bone gaps in areas vital for secure mechanical fixation. Patients with medical comorbidities such as infection, smoking, congestive heart failure, kidney disease, and diabetes have a diminished healing response, poorer implant fixation, and greater revision risk. It is these more difficult clinical scenarios that require research to evaluate more advanced treatment approaches. Such treatments can include osteogenic or antimicrobial implant coatings, allo- or autogenous cellular or tissue-based approaches, local and systemic drug delivery, surgical approaches. Regarding implant-related approaches, most experimental and numerical models do not generally impose conditions that represent mechanical instability at the implant interface, or recalcitrant healing. Many treatments will work well in forgiving settings, but fail in complex human settings with disease, bone loss, or previous surgery. Ethical considerations mandate that we justify and limit the number of animals tested, which restricts experimental permutations of treatments. Numerical models provide flexibility to evaluate multiple parameters and combinations, but generally need to employ simplifying assumptions. The objectives of this paper are to (a) to highlight the importance of mechanical, material, and surgical features to influence implant-bone healing, using a selection of results from two decades of coordinated experimental and numerical work and (b) discuss limitations of such models and the implications for research reproducibility. Focusing model conditions toward the clinical scenario to be studied, and limiting conclusions to the conditions of a particular model can increase clinical relevance and research reproducibility.

Long-term survival of GSB III elbow prostheses and risk factors for revisions

Although replacement of the elbow joint is a complex procedure there is not much clinical evidence that contributes to surgical decision-making, mainly due to small clinical samples and short follow-up. Therefore, we performed a long-term analysis up to 30years after implantation of a GSB III total elbow prosthesis to quantify long-term outcome and to identify possible risk factors for implant revision. All patients who received a primary GSB III total elbow prosthesis between 1978 and 1998 were included. Information about patient characteristics, the latest known implant status and possible risk factors were collected, Kaplan-Meier survival curves plotted, and 10- and 20-year survival calculated. The cohort was stratified for known risk factors such as diagnosis, age, or gender and included in a Cox regression analysis. A total of 253 patients [mean age at operation 56.9years (range from 17.5 to 84years)] with 293 GSB III prostheses were included. The median follow-up was 9.1years (0months to 29.3years). Whereas 81 prostheses did not need revision during the observation period, 76 had been implanted in patients who died before any revision was required, and 75 had not been revised by the last known follow-up. 61 prostheses were revised. This corresponds to a 10-year survival rate of 0.8 (95% CI 0.74-0.85) and a 20-year rate of 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.76). Prostheses in patients with post-traumatic conditions survived significantly shorter than those in patients with rheumatoid arthritis; previous operations lead to a 2.8 times greater risk of revision (p=0.004). Neither age at implantation nor gender had a significant influence on prosthesis survival. The results indicate a good long-term prognosis for this design. The prognosis has to be adjusted for the underlying disease. Previous operations such as joint reconstruction significantly increase the risk of revision.

Survival of primary total hip arthroplasty in rheumatoid arthritis patients

Background and purpose There has been a limited amount of research on survival of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We therefore performed a population-based, nationwide study to compare the survival of primary THAs in RA patients and in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. We also wanted to identify predictors of THA failure in RA patients.Methods Using the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, we identified 1,661 primary THAs in RA patients and 64,858 in OA patients, all of which were inserted between 1995 and 2008. The follow-up period was up to 14 years for both groups.Results Regarding overall THA survival, the adjusted RR for RA patients compared to OA patients was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.65–1.01). We found no difference in survival of cups between primary THAs in RA and OA patients. In contrast, there was better overall survival of stems in RA patients than in OA patients, both regarding revision due to aseptic loosening (adjusted RR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.34–0.99) and for any reason (adjusted RR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.45–0.88). In RA patients, males had a higher risk of revision than females concerning aseptic loosening of the stem, any revision of the stem, and any revision of both components.Interpretation The overall survival of primary THAs in RA patients is similar to THA survival in OA patients. Stem survival appeared to be better in RA patients, while survival of the total THA concept did not show any statistically significant differences between the two groups. In RA patients, males appear to have a greater risk of revision than females.

The Influence of Head Size and Sex on the Outcome of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing

Hip resurfacing has gained popularity for the treatment of young and active patients who have arthritis. Recent literature has demonstrated an increased rate of revision among female patients as compared with male patients who have undergone hip resurfacing. The aim of the present study was to identify any differences in survival or functional outcome between male and female patients with osteoarthritis who were managed with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. A prospective collection of data on all patients undergoing Birmingham Hip Resurfacing at a single institution was commenced in July 1997. On the basis of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 1826 patients (2123 hips, including 799 hips in female patients and 1324 hips in male patients) with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis who had undergone the procedure between July 1997 and December 2008 were identified. The variables of age, sex, preoperative Oxford Hip Score, component size used, surgical approach, lead surgeon, and surgeon experience were analyzed. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard survival model was used to identify which variables were most influential for determining revision. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.46 years (range, 0.03 to 10.9 years). The five-year cumulative survival rate for the 655 hips that were followed for a minimum of five years was 97.5% (95% confidence interval, 96.3% to 98.3%). There were forty-eight revisions. Revision was significantly associated with female sex (hazard rate, 2.03 [95% confidence interval, 1.15 to 3.58]; p = 0.014) and decreasing femoral component size (hazard rate per 4-mm decrease in size, 4.68 [95% confidence interval, 4.36 to 5.05]; p < 0.001). Revision was not associated with age (p = 0.88), surgeon (p = 0.41), surgeon experience (p = 0.30), or surgical approach (p = 0.21). A multivariate analysis including the covariates of sex, age, surgeon, surgeon experience, surgical approach, and femoral component size demonstrated that sex was no longer significantly associated with revision when femoral component size was included in the model (p = 0.37). Femoral component size alone was the best predictor of revision when all covariates were analyzed (hazard rate per 4-mm decrease in size, 4.87 [95% confidence interval, 4.37 to 5.42]; p < 0.001). The present study demonstrates that although female patients initially may appear to have a greater risk of revision, this increased risk is related to differences in the femoral component size and thus is only indirectly related to sex. Patient selection for hip resurfacing is best made on the basis of femoral head size rather than sex.

Effect of Volume on Total Hip Arthroplasty Revision Rates in the United States Medicare Population

Fewer short-term complications following total hip arthroplasty have been associated with greater hospital and surgeon procedure volume. It remains unclear if procedure volume is associated with longer-term clinical outcomes and revision rates. We examined the association between hospital and surgeon procedure volume and total hip arthroplasty revision rates in the Medicare population at six months to eight years postoperatively. A subset of the 1997 to 2004 Medicare claims data was used to identify primary and revision total hip arthroplasties. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to determine revision rates and hazard ratios associated with hospital and surgeon procedure volumes at 0.5, two, five, and eight years postoperatively. About one-third of the primary hip procedures were done at hospitals with the highest annual volumes of total hip arthroplasties (more than 100). Surgeons with an annual volume of more than fifty procedures performed approximately one-sixth of the primary total hip arthroplasties. Patients who had been operated on by these surgeons had a lower revision rate at six months than did patients treated by surgeons with an annual volume of six to ten or eleven to twenty-five procedures (adjusted hazards ratio, 1.67 and 1.63, respectively). There was no effect of surgeon volume at the time of longer-term follow-up. The majority of the total hip arthroplasties in the Medicare population from 1997 to 2004 were not performed by the highest-volume hospitals or surgeons. Our findings suggest that patients of low-volume surgeons have a greater risk of arthroplasty revision at six months but no greater risk of revision at the time of longer-term follow-up. There appeared to be no significant association between hospital volume and the rate of revisions of total hip arthroplasties.

Total Knee Arthroplasty Survivorship in the United States Medicare Population: Effect of Hospital and Surgeon Procedure Volume

Greater short-term complication risks after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been associated with lower hospital and surgeon procedure volume, but the relationship between procedure volume and implant survival is unclear. We examined the association between hospital and surgeon volume and TKA survivorship in the elderly population using 1997 to 2004 Medicare data. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression were used to determine implant survivorship and hazard ratios associated with procedure volume at 0.5, 2, 5, and 8 years. The TKA patients in lowest-volume hospitals (1-25 procedures) had a higher risk of revision at 5 and 8 years compared with those operated on in highest-volume hospitals (>200 procedures) (adjusted odds ratio: 1.57 and 1.52, respectively). Surgeon volume was not significantly correlated with implant survivorship. Our findings suggest that TKA patients at low-volume hospitals have a greater revision risk at medium-term follow-up, but not in the short term.

Minimum Ten-Year Results of Primary Bipolar Hip Arthroplasty for Degenerative Arthritis of the Hip

Bipolar hip arthroplasty has been advocated by some as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty for the treatment of degenerative arthritis of the hip. We sought to assess the results of this procedure at our institution after a minimum duration of follow-up of ten years. We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of 152 patients (173 hips) who underwent primary bipolar hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative arthritis of the hip with a cementless femoral component between 1983 and 1987. Of the original cohort of 152 patients, ninety-two patients (104 hips) were available for clinical and radiographic review at a mean of 12.2 years postoperatively. At the time of the latest follow-up, self-administered Harris hip questionnaires were used to assess pain, mobility, activity level, and overall satisfaction with the procedure. Biplanar hip radiographs were made to evaluate bipolar shell migration, osteolysis, and femoral stem fixation. At the time of the latest follow-up, nineteen patients (nineteen hips) had undergone revision to total hip arthroplasty because of mechanical failure, and three patients (three hips) were awaiting revision because of symptomatic radiographic mechanical failure. Twelve acetabular revisions were performed or scheduled for the treatment of pelvic osteolysis or protrusio acetabuli secondary to component migration. Acetabular reconstruction required bone-grafting, an oversized shell, and/or a pelvic reconstruction ring. The overall rate of mechanical failure was 21.2% (twenty-two of 104 hips), with 91% (twenty) of the twenty-two failures involving the acetabular component. Reaming of the acetabulum at the time of the index arthroplasty was associated with a 6.4-fold greater risk of revision. The rate of implant survival, with revision because of mechanical failure as the end point, was 94.2% for femoral components and 80.8% for acetabular components at a mean of 12.2 years. Of the remaining sixty-nine patients (eighty-one hips) in whom the original prosthesis was retained, seventeen patients (24.6%) rated the pain as moderate to severe. Nearly 30% of patients with an intact prosthesis required analgesics on a regular basis. Radiographs were available for fifty-eight hips (including all of the hips with moderate to severe pain) after a minimum duration of follow-up of ten years; twenty-eight of these fifty-eight hips had radiographic evidence of acetabular component migration. This bipolar cup, when used for hemiarthroplasty in patients with symptomatic arthritis of the hip, was associated with unacceptably high rates of pain, migration, osteolysis, and the need for revision to total hip arthroplasty, especially when the acetabulum had been reamed. To the extent that these findings can be generalized to similar implant designs with conventional polyethylene, we do not recommend bipolar hemiarthroplasty as the primary operative treatment for degenerative arthritis of the hip.