Aims. We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage and single-stage revision surgeries among patients with infected primary hip arthroplasty. Methods. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary arthroplasty revised with single-stage or two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014 were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HRs) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies. Results. In total, 535 primary hip arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,525 person-years) and 1,605 with two-stage procedure (5,885 person-years). All-cause re-revision was higher following single-stage revision, especially in the first three months (HR at 3 months = 1.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 3.43), p = 0.009). The risks were comparable thereafter. Re-revision for PJI was higher in the first three postoperative months for single-stage revision and waned with time (HR at 3 months = 1.81 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.68), p = 0.003; HR at 6 months = 1.25 (95% CI 0.71 to 2.21), p = 0.441; HR at 12 months = 0.94 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.63), p = 0.819). Patients initially managed with a single-stage revision received fewer revision operations (mean 1.3 (SD 0.7) vs 2.2 (SD 0.6), p < 0.001). Mortality rates were comparable between these two procedures (29/10,000 person-years vs 33/10,000). Conclusion. The risk of unplanned re-revision was lower following two-stage revision, but only in the early postoperative period. The lower overall number of revision procedures associated with a single-stage revision strategy and the equivalent mortality rates to two-stage revision are reassuring. With appropriate counselling, single-stage revision is a viable option for the treatment of hip PJI. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(5):321–330

Aims. Revision rates for ankle arthroplasties are higher than hip or knee arthroplasties. When a total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) fails, it can either undergo revision to another ankle replacement, revision of the TAA to ankle arthrodesis (fusion), or amputation. Currently there is a paucity of literature on the outcomes of these revisions. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the outcomes of revision TAA with respect to surgery type, functional outcomes, and reoperations. Methods. A systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Cochrane reviews were searched for relevant papers. Papers analyzing surgical treatment for failed ankle arthroplasties were included. All papers were reviewed by two authors. Overall, 34 papers met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed. Results. Six papers analyzed all-cause reoperations of revision ankle arthroplasties, and 14 papers analyzed failures of conversion of a TAA to fusion. It was found that 26.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.4% to 40.1%) of revision ankle arthroplasties required further surgical intervention and 13.0% (95% CI 4.9% to 23.4%) of conversion to fusions; 14.4% (95% CI 8.4% to 21.4%) of revision ankle arthroplasties failed and 8% (95% CI 4% to 13%) of conversion to fusions failed. Conclusion. Revision of primary TAA can be an effective procedure with improved functional outcomes, but has considerable risks of failure and reoperation, especially in those with periprosthetic joint infection. In those who undergo conversion of TAA to fusion, there are high rates of nonunion. Further comparative studies are required to compare both operative techniques. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):596–606

Arthrofibrosis is a less common complication following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and there are concerns that undergoing early surgery may be associated with arthrofibrosis. The aim of this study was to identify the patient and surgical risk factors for arthrofibrosis following primary ACL reconstruction. Primary ACL reconstructions prospectively recorded in the New Zealand ACL Registry between April 2014 and December 2019 were analyzed. The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) database was used to identify patients who underwent a subsequent reoperation with review of operation notes to identify those who had a reoperation for “arthrofibrosis” or “stiffness”. Univariate Chi-Square test and multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed to identify the risk factors for arthrofibrosis. 9617 primary ACL reconstructions were analyzed, of which 215 patients underwent a subsequent reoperation for arthrofibrosis (2.2%). A higher risk of arthrofibrosis was observed in female patients (adjusted HR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.22 – 2.27, p = 0.001), patients with a history of previous knee surgery (adjusted HR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.11 – 3.50, p = 0.021) and when a transtibial femoral tunnel drilling technique was used (adjusted HR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.06 – 2.28, p = 0.024). Patients who underwent early ACL reconstruction within 6 weeks of their injury did not have a higher risk of arthrofibrosis when compared to patients who underwent surgery more than 6 weeks after their injury (3.5% versus 2.1%, adjusted HR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.97 – 2.50, p = 0.07). Age, graft type and concomitant meniscal injury did not influence the rate of arthrofibrosis. Female sex, a history of previous knee surgery and a transtibial femoral tunnel drilling technique are risk factors for arthrofibrosis following primary ACL reconstruction

Aim. Repeat revision surgery of total hip or knee replacement may lead to massive bone loss of the femur. If these defects exceed a critical amount a stable fixation of a proximal or distal femur replacement may not be possible. In these extraordinary cases a total femur replacement (TFR) may be used as an option for limb salvage. In this retrospective study we examined complications, revision free survival (RFS), amputation free survival (AFS) and risk factors for decreased RFS and AFS following a TRF in cases of revision arthroplasty with a special focus on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Method. We included all implantations of a TFR in revision surgery from 2006–2018. Patients with a primary implantation of a TFR for oncological indications were not included. Complications were classified using the Henderson Classification. Primary endpoints were revision of the TFR or disarticulation of the hip. The minimum follow up was 24 month. RFS and AFS were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method, patients´ medical history was analyzed for possible risk factors for decreased RFS and AFS. Results. After applying the inclusion criteria 58 cases of a TFR in revision surgery were included with a median follow-up of 48.5 month. The median age at surgery was 68 years and the median amount of prior surgeries was 3. A soft tissue failure (Henderson Type I) appeared in 16 cases (28%) of which 13 (22%) needed revision surgery. A PJI of the TFR (Henderson Type IV) appeared in 32 cases (55%) resulting in 18 (31%) removals of the TFR and implantation of a total femur spacer. Disarticulation of the hip following a therapy resistant PJI was performed in 17 cases (29%). The overall 2-year RFS was 36% (95% confidence interval(CI) 24–48%). Patients with a Body mass Index (BMI) >30kg/m² had a decreased RFS after 24 month (>30kg/m² 11% (95%CI 0–25%) vs. <30kg/m² 50% (95%CI 34–66%)p<0.01). The overall AFS after 5 years was 68% (95%CI 54–83%). A PJI of the TFR and a BMI >30kg/m² was significantly correlated with a lower 5-year AFS (PJI 46% (95%CI 27–66%) vs no PJI 100%p<0.001) (BMI >30kg/m² 30% (95% KI 3–57%) vs. <30km/m² 85% (95% KI 73–98%)p<0.01). Conclusions. A TFR in revision arthroplasty is a valuable option for limb salvage but complications in need of further revision surgery are common. Patients with a BMI >30kg/m² should be informed regarding the increased risk for revision surgery and loss of extremity before operation

Introduction. Distal femur fractures around a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are a growing problem for orthopaedic surgeons. The purpose of this study was to identify risks of reoperation for nonunion following open reduction and internal fixation of TKA periprosthetic distal femur fractures (PDFF). Method. Patients with PDFF (AO 33A-C[VB1, C1, D1], Su types 1-3) managed operatively with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria were acute management with a distal femur replacement, less than 6 months of follow-up, and lack of injury or follow-up radiographs. The primary outcome measure was reoperation to achieve bony union. Comparisons were made between cases that did and did not require a reoperation to achieve union. Univariate analysis was used to identify factors to be analyzed in multivariate analysis to determine independent risk factors for the primary outcome. Result. A total of 77 patients met inclusion criteria. Union rate was 69/77 (89.6%). There were no differences between the groups for age, sex, BMI, comorbidities, Su classification, open injury, or mechanism of injury. Multivariate analysis identified risks for nonunion including post-operative malalignment (OR 1.41; CI 1.20-1.64; p<0.001), notching pre-operatively (OR 1.22; CI 1.04-1.42; p=0.012), presence of screws through fracture line (OR 1.28; CI 1.17-1.39; p<0.001), plate length <12 holes (OR 1.16; CI 1.02-1.33; p=0.024) and screw density greater than 0.4 (OR 2.18; CI 1.25-3.78; p=0.006). Conclusion. The reoperation rate to promote union was 10.4%. The study identified post-operative malalignment, notching pre-operatively, presence of screws through fracture line, plate length <12 holes, and proximal screw density greater than 40% as independent risk factors for nonunion

Aim. To investigate the incidence and time-trend in reoperation due to deep Surgical Site Infection (SSI) following hip fracture surgery. Method. This was a population-based, nationwide, cohort study. We included 74,771 from the Danish Multidisciplinary Hip Fractures Register (1) consisting of patients 65 years of age or older, who underwent surgery between January 1. st. 2005 and December 31. st. 2016 for all types of hip fracture. Cross-linkage with the Danish National Patient Register and The Danish Civil Registration system was made. Demographic data extracted included vital status, civil status, gender, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), fracture classification (AO/OTA 31A-C) and surgical procedures binary registered as joint replacement or internal fixation, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and secondary diseases not included in CCI. Outcome was reoperations due to deep SSI in accordance with the definition from Centre for Disease Control (2). We computed cumulative incidence rates and risk ratios (RR) by calendar year periods and by different risk factors, considering death as competing risk and adjusting for age, gender, CCI, fracture type and surgery type. Results. Within 365 days of primary surgery 2.1% of all hip fractures had undergone reoperation due to deep SSI. During the period 2005–2016, the incidence of reoperation due to SSI decreased from 2.7% to 1.7%, We could not identify differences in reoperation due to SSI within one year regarding gender, BMI or CCI. Patients aged above 85 had about 50% lower risk of being reoperated compared with the youngest age group; 65–74 years (RR: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.4:0.6). The RR for reoperation due to deep SSI was lower for patients with pertrochanteric or subtrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA: 31A1-3) versus femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA: 31B1-3), RR was 0.7 (95%CI: 0.7:0.8). However, RR for surgery type (joint replacement vs internal fixation) at 365 days was significantly lower for joint replacement, RR: 0.6 (95% CI: 0.6:0.7). Conclusions. This study shows reoperation risk due to SSI for all types of hip fractures of 2.1%. There was a 45% decrease in reoperation over time from 2005 to 2016. However, the risk of revision is still high, and further action in avoidance of SSI should be taken

Aims. Hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated collars have been shown to reduce aseptic loosening of massive endoprostheses following primary surgery. Limited information exists about their effectiveness in revision surgery. The aim of this study was to radiologically assess osteointegration to HA-coated collars of cemented massive endoprostheses following revision surgery. Methods. Retrospective review of osseointegration frequency, pattern, and timing to a specific HA-coated collar on massive endoprostheses used in revision surgery at our tertiary referral centre between 2010 to 2017 was undertaken. Osseointegration was radiologically classified on cases with a minimum follow-up of six months. Results. In all, 39 patients underwent radiological review at mean 43.5 months; 22/39 (56.4%) showed no osseointegration to the collar. Revision endoprostheses for aseptic loosening were less likely to show osseointegration compared with other indications for revision. Oncological cases with previous or current infection were more likely to show osseointegration to ≥ 1 collar side than those without evidence of prior infection. Conclusion. This seven-year review identified osseointegration of HA-coated collars after revision surgery is less likely (43.6%, 17/39) than after primary surgery. Young patients who undergo revision surgery following initial oncological indication may benefit the most from this collar design. Use in revision oncological cases with a history of infection may be beneficial. HA-coated collars showed limited benefit for patients undergoing revision for failed arthroplasty with history of infection. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(6):371–379

Introduction. Knee arthroplasty (KA), encompassing Total Knee Replacement (TKR) and Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (UKR), is one of the most common orthopedic procedures, aimed at alleviating severe knee arthritis. Postoperative KA management, especially radiographic imaging, remains a substantial financial burden and lacks standardised protocols for its clinical utility during follow-up. Method. In this retrospective multicentre cohort study, data were analysed from January 2014 to March 2020 for adult patients undergoing primary KA at Imperial NHS Trust. Patients were followed over a five-year period. Four machine learning models were developed to evaluate if post-operative X-ray frequency can predict revision surgery. The best-performing model was used to assess the risk of revision surgery associated with different number of X-rays. Result. The study assessed 289 knees with a 2.4% revision rate. The revision group had more X-rays on average than the primary group. The best performing model was Logistic Regression (LR), which indicated that each additional X-ray raised the revision risk by 52% (p<0.001). Notably, having four or more X-rays was linked to a three-fold increase in risk of revision (OR=3.02; p<0.001). Our results align with the literature that immediate post-operative X-rays have limited utility, making the 2nd post-operative X-ray of highest importance in understanding the patient's trajectory. These insights can enhance management by improving risk stratification for patients at higher revision surgery risk. Despite LR being the best-performing model, it is limited by the dataset's significant class imbalance. Conclusion. X-ray frequency can independently predict revision surgery. This study provides insights that can guide surgeons in evidence-based post-operative decision-making. To use those findings and influence post-operative management, future studies should build on this predictive model by incorporating a more robust dataset, surgical indications, and X-ray findings. This will allow early identification of high-risk patients, allowing for personalised post-operative recommendations

Introduction. The Kaplan Meier estimator is widely used in orthopedics. In situations where another event prevents the occurrence of the event of interest, the Kaplan Meier estimator is not appropriate and a competing risks model has to be applied. We questioned how much bias is introduced by erroneous use of the Kaplan Meier estimator instead of a competing risks model in a hip revision surgery cohort. Methods. In our previously published cohort study, 62 acetabular revisions (58 patients) were performed between January 1979 and March 1986. Twenty to twenty-five years after surgery, no patients were lost to follow-up. Thirteen patients underwent revision surgery. During the 20 to 25 years follow-up, 30 patients (33 acetabular revisions) died of causes unrelated to their hip surgery. Results. In the data set analyzed, the Kaplan Meier method overestimates the probability of implant failure by 6.7%, 13.8%,26.8%,48.6% at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years respectively. Discussion. We have performed two different analyses for a hip revision surgery cohort and discussed the use of a competing risks model. Ignoring competing risks leads to biased estimations of the probability of having future revision surgery. Therefore we recommended the use of a competing risks model whenever there are competing risks present

Aims. We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage revision surgery and single-stage revision surgery among patients with infected primary knee arthroplasty. Methods. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary knee arthroplasty, initially revised with a single-stage or a two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014, were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HR) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies. Results. A total of 489 primary knee arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,390 person-years) and 2,377 with two-stage procedure (8,349 person-years). The adjusted incidence rates of all-cause re-revision and for infection were comparable between these strategies (HR overall five years, 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.52), p = 0.308; HR overall five years, 0.99 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.39), p = 0.949, respectively). Patients initially managed with single-stage revision received fewer revision procedures overall than after two-stage revision (1.2 vs 2.2, p < 0.001). Mortality was lower for single-stage revision between six and 18 months postoperative (HR at six months, 0.51 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.00), p = 0.049 HR at 18 months, 0.33 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.99), p = 0.048) and comparable at other timepoints. Conclusion. The risk of re-revision was similar between single- and two-stage revision for infected primary knee arthroplasty. Single-stage group required fewer revisions overall, with lower or comparable mortality at specific postoperative periods. The single-stage revision is a safe and effective strategy to treat infected knee arthroplasties. There is potential for increased use to reduce the burden of knee PJI for patients, and for the healthcare system. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(10):690–699

Aims. Fracture-related infection (FRI) is commonly classified based on the time of onset of symptoms. Early infections (< two weeks) are treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). For late infections (> ten weeks), guidelines recommend implant removal due to tolerant biofilms. For delayed infections (two to ten weeks), recommendations are unclear. In this study we compared infection clearance and bone healing in early and delayed FRI treated with DAIR in a rabbit model. Methods. Staphylococcus aureus was inoculated into a humeral osteotomy in 17 rabbits after plate osteosynthesis. Infection developed for one week (early group, n = 6) or four weeks (delayed group, n = 6) before DAIR (systemic antibiotics: two weeks, nafcillin + rifampin; four weeks, levofloxacin + rifampin). A control group (n = 5) received revision surgery after four weeks without antibiotics. Bacteriology of humerus, soft-tissue, and implants was performed seven weeks after revision surgery. Bone healing was assessed using a modified radiological union scale in tibial fractures (mRUST). Results. Greater bacterial burden in the early group compared to the delayed and control groups at revision surgery indicates a retraction of the infection from one to four weeks. Infection was cleared in all animals in the early and delayed groups at euthanasia, but not in the control group. Osteotomies healed in the early group, but bone healing was significantly compromised in the delayed and control groups. Conclusion. The duration of the infection from one to four weeks does not impact the success of infection clearance in this model. Bone healing, however, is impaired as the duration of the infection increases. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(3):127–135

Aims. To determine the major risk factors for unplanned reoperations (UROs) following corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) and their interactions, using machine learning-based prediction algorithms and game theory. Methods. Patients who underwent surgery for ASD, with a minimum of two-year follow-up, were retrospectively reviewed. In total, 210 patients were included and randomly allocated into training (70% of the sample size) and test (the remaining 30%) sets to develop the machine learning algorithm. Risk factors were included in the analysis, along with clinical characteristics and parameters acquired through diagnostic radiology. Results. Overall, 152 patients without and 58 with a history of surgical revision following surgery for ASD were observed; the mean age was 68.9 years (SD 8.7) and 66.9 years (SD 6.6), respectively. On implementing a random forest model, the classification of URO events resulted in a balanced accuracy of 86.8%. Among machine learning-extracted risk factors, URO, proximal junction failure (PJF), and postoperative distance from the posterosuperior corner of C7 and the vertical axis from the centroid of C2 (SVA) were significant upon Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Conclusion. The major risk factors for URO following surgery for ASD, i.e. postoperative SVA and PJF, and their interactions were identified using a machine learning algorithm and game theory. Clinical benefits will depend on patient risk profiles. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(4):245–255

Aim. Prosthetic joint infections (PJI) and fracture related infections (FRI) are the most challenging complications in orthopaedic surgery. An interdisciplinary approach is mandatory not only to correctly diagnose and treat major musculoskeletal infections but also to address the comorbidities and impairments these patients are not rarely suffering from. Since, little data exists on cardiac complications following PJI and FRI revision surgery, this study aimed to investigate the risk of perioperative myocardial injury (PMI) and mortality. Method. We prospectively included consecutive patients at high cardiovascular risk (defined as expected postoperative hospital stay of >24 hours PLUS age >45 years with pre-existing coronary, peripheral or cerebrovascular artery disease OR age >65 years) undergoing major orthopaedic surgery between 2014 and 2016. All patients received a systematic screening to reliably detect PMI, using serial measurements of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT). All-cause mortality was assessed at 30 days and one year. Multivariable logistic regression models were applied to compare incidence of PMI and mortality between patients undergoing septic revision surgery (for PJI/FRI) and patients receiving aseptic major bone and joint surgery. Results. In total 911 consecutive patients, with an overall PMI rate of 15.4% (n=140) were included. The PMI incidence in patients undergoing septic revision surgery was significantly higher compared to aseptic orthopaedic surgeries (29.2% vs 14.3%, p=0.001), also after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio 2.1, p=0.02). Mortality was higher at one year (16.9% vs. 8.3%, p=0.037) and numerically at 30 days (6.2% vs. 2.4%, p=0.085) in patients undergoing septic revision surgery. Virulence of the disease-causing pathogen showed no significant relationship with PMI incidence or mortality. Conclusions. Patients undergoing revision surgery for PJI or FRI were at a distinct higher risk of PMI and death compared to matched non-septic patients. In major bone and joint infections screening for PMI and treatment in specialized multidisciplinary units should be considered

Primary total hip replacement (THR) is a successful and common operation which orthopaedic trainees must demonstrate competence in prior to completion of training. This study aimed to determine the impact of operating surgeon grade and level of supervision on the incidence of 1-year patient mortality and all-cause revision following elective primary THR in a large UK training centre. National Joint Registry (NJR) data for all elective primary THR performed in a single University Teaching Hospital from 2005–2020 were used, with analysis performed on the 15-year dataset divided into 5-year temporal periods (B1 2005–2010, B2 2010–2015, B3 2015–2020). Outcome measures were mortality and revision surgery at one year, in relation to lead surgeon grade, and level of supervision for trainee-led operations. 9999 eligible primary THR were undertaken, of which 5526 (55.3%) were consultant led (CL), and 4473 (44.7%) trainees led (TL). Of TL, 2404 (53.7%) were non-consultant supervised (TU), and 2069 (46.3%) consultant supervised (TS). The incidence of 1-year patient mortality was 2.05% (n=205), and all-cause revision was 1.11% (n=111). There was no difference in 1-year mortality between TL (n=82, 1.8%) and CL (n=123, 2.2%) operations (p=0.20, OR 0.78, CI 0.55–1.10). The incidence of 1-year revision was not different for TL (n=56, 1.3%) and CL (n=55, 1.0%) operations (p=0.15, OR 1.37, CI 0.89–2.09). Overall, there was no temporal change for either outcome measure between TL or CL operations. A significant increase in revision within 1-year was observed in B3 between TU (n=17, 2.7%) compared to CL (n=17, 1.0%) operations (p=0.005, OR 2.81, CI 1.35–5.87). We found no difference in 1-year mortality or 1-year all-cause revision rate between trainee-led primary THR and consultant-led operations over the entire fifteen-year period. However, unsupervised trainee led THR in the most recent 5-year block (2015–2020) has a significantly increased risk of early revision, mainly due to instability and prosthetic joint infection. This suggests that modern surgical training is having a detrimental effect on THR patient outcomes. More research is needed to understand the reasons if this trend is to be reversed

Aims. Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised. Methods. This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups. Results. A total of 663 cases were identified (486 index rTKAs and 177 multiply revised TKAs). There were no differences in demographics, rTKA type, or indication for revision. Multiply revised patients had significantly longer rTKA operative times (p < 0.001), and were more likely to be discharged to an acute rehabilitation centre (6.2% vs 4.5%) or skilled nursing facility (29.9% vs 17.5%; p = 0.003). Patients who had been multiply revised were also significantly more likely to have subsequent reoperation (18.1% vs 9.5%; p = 0.004) and re-revision (27.1% vs 18.1%; p = 0.013). The number of previous revisions did not correlate with the number of subsequent reoperations (r = 0.038; p = 0.670) or re-revisions (r = −0.102; p = 0.251). Conclusion. Multiply revised TKA had worse outcomes, with higher rates of facility discharge, longer operative times, and greater reoperation and re-revision rates compared to index rTKA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(5):393–398

Hip dysplasia is a common cause of hip pain in young adults. Pelvic osteotomy (PO) techniques are the gold standard for treating symptomatic patients, albeit technically demanding. This study aimed to (1) evaluate the 90-day complication rate, and (2) investigate the reasons, frequency and timing of reoperations following primary PO procedures. We retrospectively analysed the National Hospital Episode Statistics database, examining all patients aged over 14 who underwent PO in NHS England hospitals from 2010 to 2023. We identified index procedures and reoperations using relevant OPCS-4 codes. We analysed patient demographics, 90-day complications, and readmission rates for ipsilateral metalwork removal, revision PO, hip arthroscopy (HA), and THR conversion, and calculated the mean time to reoperations. This study included 1,348 PO cases (mean age: 28.7±9.1 years, 89.5% female). The mean hospital stay was 5.4±3.9 days, with a 90-day readmission rate of 0.52% at a mean of 51.0±17.2 days. The most common causes were infection (0.22%) and reoperation (0.15%). The 90-day rate of pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis was 0.074%. One patient died within 90 days. Overall, 810 patients (60.1%) were readmitted for a subsequent hip procedure at a mean of 2.12±1.90 years following their primary PO. Metalwork removal was required in 616 patients (45.7%) at a mean of 1.70±1.19 years. Readmission rates for revision PO, HA, and THR, were 4.23% (mean time: 2.89±0.82 years), 4.15% (mean time: 2.91±2.28 years) and 6.01% (mean time: 5.24±3.08 years) respectively. This study highlights a low 90-day complication rate following primary PO, but a high reoperation rate, mainly for metalwork removal. We provide the most up-to-date report of revision PO, HA and THR conversion rates in England. These findings provide valuable insight that can facilitate informed decision-making, expectation-setting, and post-operative planning, also establishing a benchmark for future quality improvement

Aims. Despite multiple trials and case series on hip hemiarthroplasty designs, guidance is still lacking on which implant to use. One particularly deficient area is long-term outcomes. We present over 1,000 consecutive cemented Thompson’s hemiarthroplasties over a ten-year period, recording all accessible patient and implant outcomes. Methods. Patient identifiers for a consecutive cohort treated between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2011 were linked to radiographs, surgical notes, clinic letters, and mortality data from a national dataset. This allowed charting of their postoperative course, complications, readmissions, returns to theatre, revisions, and deaths. We also identified all postoperative attendances at the Emergency and Outpatient Departments, and recorded any subsequent skeletal injuries. Results. In total, 1,312 Thompson’s hemiarthroplasties were analyzed (mean age at surgery 82.8 years); 125 complications were recorded, necessitating 82 returns to theatre. These included 14 patients undergoing aspiration or manipulation under anaesthesia, 68 reoperations (5.2%) for debridement and implant retention (n = 12), haematoma evacuation (n = 2), open reduction for dislocation (n = 1), fixation of periprosthetic fracture (n = 5), and 48 revised stems (3.7%), for infection (n = 13), dislocation (n = 12), aseptic loosening (n = 9), persistent pain (n = 6), periprosthetic fracture (n = 4), acetabular erosion (n = 3), and metastatic bone disease (n = 1). Their status at ten years is summarized as follows: 1,180 (89.9%) dead without revision, 34 (2.6%) dead having had revision, 84 (6.6%) alive with the stem unrevised, and 14 (1.1%) alive having had revision. Cumulative implant survivorship was 90.3% at ten years; patient survivorship was 7.4%. Conclusion. The Thompson’s stem demonstrates very low rates of complications requiring reoperation and revision, up to ten years after the index procedure. Fewer than one in ten patients live for ten years after fracture. This study supports the use of a cemented Thompson’s implant as a cost-effective option for frail hip fracture patients. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(9):710–715

Hip arthroscopy (HA) is an effective treatment for various hip conditions but has a steep learning curve and its effect on long-term joint preservation is unclear. This study uses population-level data to assess (1) the 90-day complication rate, and (2) the frequency and timing of revision HA, total hip replacement (THR), and pelvic osteotomy (PO) following primary HA. We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Hospital Episode Statistics database, examining all patients who underwent primary HA in NHS hospitals in England from 2010 to 2023 using relevant OPCS-4 codes. We evaluated patient demographics, 90-day complications, and reoperation rates for revision HA, THR, and PO. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to calculate frequencies and average time to reoperations. We included 22,401 HA procedures in the study. The mean LOS was 0.82±2.04 days. The 90-day readmission rate was 0.17% at a mean of 54.4±8.1 days. The most common reasons for readmission were reoperation (0.071%), followed by infection (0.031%), pulmonary embolism (0.027%), pain (0.022%), bleeding (0.018%), and deep vein thrombosis (0.004%). One patient died within 90 days. Overall, 4942 patients (22.1%) required further surgery at a mean of 2.71±2.27 years. The rates of revision HA, conversion to THR, and PO were 6.94%, 14.6%, and 0.50% at a mean of 2.39±1.79, 2.87±2.46, and 2.26±1.80 years respectively. Female patients had higher rates of reoperation than males for conversion to THR (9.99% vs 4.63%), revision HA (4.92% vs 2.02%), and subsequent PO (0.43% vs. 0.06%) (p<0.001). This study demonstrates a low short-term complication rate after primary HA, supporting existing literature. However, a large proportion of patients required further surgery, especially females. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection and counselling before HA to optimise outcomes, as well as further research on factors influencing longer-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness

Aim. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). As preoperative diagnosis can be difficult, some patients who undergo planned aseptic revision surgery might have positive intraoperative cultures and later be classified as infected. In this retrospective study we analyzed the influence of intraoperative positive cultures and possible underlying risk factors in patients undergoing planned aseptic THA revision. Method. We retrospectively analyzed 276 cases of aseptic THA revision surgery between 2010 and 2017 who had a minimum follow-up period of 24 months. All patients underwent preoperative serum and synovial diagnostics according to the Center of Disease Control (CDC) (2010) or Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) Criteria (2011–2017) for PJI and were classified as aseptic prior to surgery. In all cases intraoperative tissue samples were taken and reviewed. Primary endpoint was defined as any complication leading to revision surgery. Secondary endpoint was explantation due to PJI or death. Revision free survival (RFS) and infection free survival (IFS) for intraoperative negative and positive cultures was calculated via Kaplan Meyer Method. Patients’ medical history was analyzed for possible risk factors for positive cultures. Results. In 96 (34.78%) cases positive cultures were found. 67 (24.28%) had a single positive culture and 29 (10.51%) had ≥ two positive cultures. Coagulase negative staphylococci were found in 57.69% of the positive cultures. While the revision free survivorship was not different in patients with single positive cultures compared to patients with negative cultures (72.86 (95%CI 60.08–85.64) vs 83.01 months (95%CI 75.42–90.60) p=0.201), patients with ≥ two positive cultures had a reduced mean RFS (38.46 (95%CI 20.16–50.76) vs. 83.01 months (95%CI 75.42–90.60) p<0.02). 22 (7.97%) patients underwent explantation of the THA due to PJI. The IFS was reduced if ≥ two cultures were positive compared to culture negative patients (56.48 (95%CI 46.20–66.75) vs 110.78 months (95%CI 106.78–114.77) p=0.001). Risk for explantation due to PJI increased if ≥ two cultures were positive (Odds Ratio (OR) 3.19 (95%CI 1.36–7.52). A BMI ≥ 30 was associated with the risk of ≥ two positive cultures (OR 2.85 (95%CI 1.40–5.78). Conclusions. Occurrence of two or more positive cultures in aseptic revision THA has devastating influence on the revision free survival and infection free survival. As the risk for ≥ two positive cultures increase almost 3-fold in patients with a BMI ≥ 30, extended preoperative diagnostics in obese patients should be considered to detect possible low grade PJI before revision surgery

Recent advances in arthroplasty for the hip and the knee have motivated modern foot and ankle research to perfect the implant and technique for the optimal total ankle replacement. Unlike in the hip where different approaches can be done with similar implants, the approach of a total ankle is intimately associated to the prosthetic design. The anterior and lateral approaches have pros and cons regarding their respective soft tissue complications, osteotomy necessity, orientation of the bone cut and gutter visualization. While both have been studied independently, very few reports have compared both in the same setting. This study retrospectively looked at the difference in reoperations rate after each ankle arthroplasty within two years estimating that both had similar rate of return to the operating room. A retrospective study was conducted from a single center between 2014 and 2017 including a total of 115 total ankles performed by one of four fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeon. Re-operations were reported in the charts as an operative report. The index approach used was determined by the surgeon's practice preference. Patients were included when they had a primary TAR in the timeframe noted and had a complete dataset up to at least the two-year data. This cohort comprised 67 anterior and 48 lateral with balanced demographic for age (95%CI 63–67 yo) and gender (47% F). The lateral group had more complex cases with higher COFAS type arthritis. Comparing the two groups, a total of 40 reoperations (7 anterior, 33 lateral) occurred in 27 patients (5A, 22L). One patient had up to four related reoperations. The only revision was in the anterior group. The only soft tissue reconstruction was an STSG in the lateral group. Nine reoperations were irrigation debridement related to an infective process (3 A, 6L). The majority (19/33) of reoperations in the lateral group were gutter debridement (8) or lateral hardware removal (11). Operative time was not statistically different. The odds ratio of having a reoperation with a laterally based TAR was 6.19 compared to the anterior group. This retrospective study outlines the intermediate results at two years of lateral and anterior total ankle replacements. This is a first study of this kind in the literature. This study did show that there were more reoperations after a laterally-based TAR than an anterior TAR, recognizing the significant case complexity imbalance between groups. This speaks to the relative increase resource utilization of laterally based TAR patients. Both implant designs carry different reoperation rates favoring the anterior group however larger prospective datasets will be needed with patient-reported outcome