Temporal trends of primary hinge knee arthroplasty and risk factors associated with revision: National Joint Registry data from 2003 to 2018 for 4921 patients

High survivorship rate and good clinical outcomes after high tibial osteotomy in patients with radiological advanced medial knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The role of valgus producing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) for the treatment of advanced knee osteoarthritis (OA) is still controversial. The aim of the current systematic review was to assess survivorship and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of high tibial osteotomy in patients with radiological advanced medial knee OA.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE database was performed in July 2023 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to identify studies investigating the survivorship rate and PROMs of valgus-producing high tibial osteotomy in patients with advanced knee OA at x-ray assessment in the medial compartment at minimum-two-years follow up. Advanced radiological OA was defined as Kellgren Lawrence (K-L) ≥ 3 or Ahlbäch ≥ 2. Survivorship was defined as percentage of patients free of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at follow-up. Clinical interpretation of provided PROMs were performed according to minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) target values reported in literature. Survivorship data and PROMs scores were extracted, and studies were stratified based on selected study features. The quality of included studies was assessed with modified Coleman score.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies, totalling 1296 knees with a mean age between 46.9 and 67 years old, were included. Average survivorship was of 74.6% (range 60 - 98.1%) at 10-years follow up. The subjective scoring systems showed good results according to MCID and PASS, and postoperative improvements were partially maintained until final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

HTO is worth considering as treatment choice even in patients affected by radiological advanced medial knee osteoarthritis. Long term survivorship and good patient reported clinical outcomes could be expected in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; systematic review of level III-IV studies.

Longer term follow up of outcomes following implantation of a modular rotating hinge knee prosthesis: 53 implants at mean 7.6 year follow up

BACKGROUND

Rotating hinge knee replacements are becoming more common but have historically had high complication and failure rates. This study is one of the largest to assess the implant survival and patient outcomes of a third-generation rotating hinge knee replacement at a single tertiary orthopaedic centre.

METHODS

Data for consecutive operations at our tertiary unit between 2006 to 2020 were assessed with review of electronic patient and radiology records. The Oxford Knee Score was used to assess outcomes and the Kaplan Meier method used to estimate survivorship.

RESULTS

53 rotating hinge knees were implanted in 46 patients (13 male, 33 female) at a mean age of 67.8 years. 21 were primary and 32 were revision procedures. Indications for use of this implant included instability, loosening, fracture and infection. Survivorship was 77.8% at the mean follow up of 7.6 years. A total of 29 complications were noted with ongoing pain, stiffness, infection and patellofemoral symptoms being the most common. 8% of unresurfaced patellas required a subsequent secondary resurfacing. The Oxford Knee Score demonstrated a significant improvement from 14.6 preoperatively to 27.5 at one year postoperatively, which was maintained in the longer term.

CONCLUSION

The third-generation rotating hinge knee implant in use at our unit has improved outcomes for patients. The survivorship of the implant is comparable to the published literature, although there is a paucity of data. The complication rates remain relatively high and patients should be counselled appropriately. We advise resurfacing the patella to avoid the need for secondary procedures.

Hinge prostheses in the revision of unicompartmental knee replacement: a descriptive analysis of data from the national joint registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) is an effective surgical strategy in patients with isolated medial or lateral compartment osteoarthritis. Study aims were to (1) describe the epidemiology of patients undergoing revision of UKR to a hinge knee replacement (HKR); (2) identify factors influencing time to revision; (3) evaluate HKR survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An analysis of National Joint Registry data was undertaken, exploring revision of UKR to HKR between 2007 and April 2021. Descriptive analysis of eligible patients and Cox Regression to identify key determinants of time to revision were performed. Failure of HKR post-revision was assessed using survival analysis.

RESULTS

111 patients underwent revision of UKR to HKR. Median age at revision was 70 years and most common indications were instability (n = 42) and infection (n = 22). The most common implant was a rotating HKR. Significant independent factors associated with earlier revision were periprosthetic fracture (p = 0.03) and malalignment (p = 0.03). Progressive osteoarthritis (p = 0.01) and higher ASA grades (3: p = 0.01, 4: p < 0.01) delayed time to revision; patient sex and age were not significant factors. Ten patients required subsequent re-revision; median age at re-revision was 61 years. HKR revised from UKR had an 89.3% revision-free risk at 5 years. Male sex (p < 0.01) and younger age (p < 0.01) were associated with re-revision.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors associated with time to revision may be used to counsel patients prior to UKR. The survivorship of the HKR of 89.3% at 5 years is concerning and careful consideration should be given when using this level of constraint when revising UKR in younger or male patients.

First-time revision knee arthroplasty using a hinged prosthesis : temporal trends, indications, and risk factors associated with re-revision using data from the National Joint Registry for 3,855 patients

AIMS

The aim of this study was to identify variables associated with time to revision, demographic details associated with revision indication, and type of prosthesis employed, and to describe the survival of hinge knee arthroplasty (HKA) when used for first-time knee revision surgery and factors that were associated with re-revision.

METHODS

Patient demographic details, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, indication for revision, surgical approach, surgeon grade, implant type (fixed and rotating), time of revision from primary implantation, and re-revision if undertaken were obtained from the National Joint Registry data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man over an 18-year period (2003 to 2021).

RESULTS

There were 3,855 patient episodes analyzed with a median age of 73 years (interquartile range (IQR) 66 to 80), and the majority were female (n = 2,480, 64.3%). The median time to revision from primary knee arthroplasty was 1,219 days (IQR 579 to 2,422). Younger age (p < 0.001), decreasing ASA grade (p < 0.001), and indications for revision of sepsis (p < 0.001), unexplained pain (p < 0.001), non-polyethylene wear (p < 0.001), and malalignment (p < 0.001) were all associated with an earlier time to revision from primary implantation. The median follow-up was 4.56 years (range 0.00 to 17.52), during which there were 410 re-revisions. The overall unadjusted probability of re-revision for all revision HKAs at one, five, and ten years after surgery were 2.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 3.3), 10.7% (95% CI 9.6 to 11.9), and 16.2% (95% CI 14.5 to 17.9), respectively. Male sex (p < 0.001), younger age (p < 0.001), revision for septic indications (p < 0.001) or implant fracture (p = 0.010), a fixed hinge (p < 0.001), or surgery performed by a non-consultant grade (p = 0.023) were independently associated with an increased risk of re-revision.

CONCLUSION

There were several factors associated with time to first revision. The re-revision rate was 16.2% at ten years; however, the risk factors associated with an increased risk of re-revision could be used to counsel patients regarding their outcome.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):47-55.