Aims. The aim of this study is to report the implant survival and factors associated with revision of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) using data from the Dutch national registry. Methods. All TEAs recorded in the Dutch national registry between 2014 and 2020 were included. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis, and a logistic regression model was used to assess the factors associated with revision. Results. A total of 514 TEAs were included, of which 35 were revised. The five-year implant survival was 91%. Male sex, a higher BMI, and previous surgery to the same elbow showed a statistically significant association with revision (p < 0.036). Of the 35 revised implants, ten (29%) underwent a second revision. Conclusion. This study reports a five-year implant survival of TEA of 91%. Patient factors associated with revision are defined and can be used to optimize informed consent and shared decision-making. There was a high rate of secondary revisions. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(2):110–119

Aims

Body exhaust suits or surgical helmet systems (colloquially, ‘space suits’) are frequently used in many forms of arthroplasty, with the aim of providing personal protection to surgeons and, perhaps, reducing periprosthetic joint infections, although this has not consistently been borne out in systematic reviews and registry studies. To date, no large-scale study has investigated whether this is applicable to shoulder arthroplasty. We used the New Zealand Joint Registry to assess whether the use of surgical helmet systems was associated with lower all-cause revision or revision for deep infection in primary shoulder arthroplasties.

Aims

There are concerns regarding complications and longevity of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) in young patients, and the few previous publications are mainly limited to reports on linked elbow devices. We investigated the clinical outcome of unlinked TEA for patients aged less than 50 years with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Aims. Controversy about the use of an anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) in young arthritic patients relates to which is the ideal form of fixation for the glenoid component: cemented or cementless. This study aimed to evaluate implant survival of aTSA when used in patients aged < 60 years with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA), and to compare the survival of cemented all-polyethylene and cementless metal-backed glenoid components. Materials and Methods. A total of 69 consecutive aTSAs were performed in 67 patients aged < 60 years with primary glenohumeral OA. Their mean age at the time of surgery was 54 years (35 to 60). Of these aTSAs, 46 were undertaken using a cemented polyethylene component and 23 were undertaken using a cementless metal-backed component. The age, gender, preoperative function, mobility, premorbid glenoid erosion, and length of follow-up were comparable in the two groups. The patients were reviewed clinically and radiographically at a mean of 10.3 years (5 to 12, . sd. 26) postoperatively. Kaplan–Meier survivorship analysis was performed with revision as the endpoint. Results. A total of 26 shoulders (38%) underwent revision surgery: ten (22%) in the polyethylene group and 16 (70%) in the metal-backed group (p < 0.0001). At 12 years’ follow-up, the rate of implant survival was 74% (. sd.  0.09) for polyethylene components and 24% (. sd.  0.10) for metal-backed components (p < 0.0002). Glenoid loosening or failure was the indication for revision in the polyethylene group, whereas polyethylene wear with metal-on-metal contact, instability, and insufficiency of the rotator cuff were the indications for revision in the metal-backed group. Preoperative posterior subluxation of the humeral head with a biconcave/retroverted glenoid (Walch B2) had an adverse effect on the survival of a metal-backed component. Conclusion. The survival of a cemented polyethylene glenoid component is three times higher than that of a cementless metal-backed glenoid component ten years after aTSA in patients aged < 60 years with primary glenohumeral OA. Patients with a biconcave (B2) glenoid have the highest risk of failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:485–92