Objectives. Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) is a conservative option for degenerative disease, with mobile (Oxford UKR) and fixed bearing (Physica ZUK) the most commonly used devices. The primary reasons for revising UKRs include disease progression (36.9%), loosening (31.7%), and pain (7.5%). Loosening typically occurs due to osteolysis caused by wear particles from the polyethylene (PE) inserts. There is limited published literature which has quantified volumetric material loss from the PE inserts of cemented fixed-bearing UKRs. This study aimed to quantify bearing wear and backside deformation of these PE components. Design and Methods. At our national retrieval centre, we measured changes volumetric bearing wear and backside deformation of 31 explanted fixed-bearing Physica ZUK UKR PE inserts using a peer-reviewed methodology based on coordinate measuring machine analysis. These explants had been revised for any indication [Females (19) and Males (12)]. The location of the wear scars was identified and mapped. We compared the volumetric wear from the bearing surface with contemporary total knee replacement (TKR) inserts. Results. The median (IQR) total volumetric wear of the UKR PEs [96(50-152) mm. 3. ] was significantly higher (p<0.001) than contemporary TKR PEs [40 (24-83) mm. 3. ]. The median (IQR) total volumetric wear of the PEs in males [148(122-200) mm. 3. ] was significantly higher(p=0.016) than in females [56(61-119) mm. 3. ]. The wear scars were situated in the anterior third in 61% of cases, with 26% located posteriorly. Examination of the PE backside surfaces exhibited damage in the area directly inferior to the bearing surface wear scar in the majority of cases. Conclusion. In conclusion, this study highlights significant PE wear of Physica ZUK UKR inserts, with higher wear rates compared to contemporary TKR inserts, particularly in males

Aims. Day-case knee and hip replacement, in which patients are discharged on the day of surgery, has been gaining popularity during the last two decades, and particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic review presents the evidence comparing day-case to inpatient-stay surgery. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed of MEDLINE, Embase, and grey literature databases to include all studies which compare day-case with inpatient knee and hip replacement. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate using a random effects model. The protocol was registered prospectively (PROSPERO CRD42023392811). Results. A total of 38 studies were included, with a total of 83,888 day-case procedures. The studies were predominantly from the USA and Canada, observational, and with a high risk of bias. Day-case patients were a mean of 2.08 years younger (95% CI 1.05 to 3.12), were more likely to be male (odds ratio (OR) 1.3 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.41)), and had a lower mean BMI and American Society of Anesthesiologists grades compared with inpatients. Overall, day-case surgery was associated with significantly lower odds of readmission (OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.96); p = 0.009), subsequent emergency department attendance (OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.79); p < 0.001), and complications (OR 0.7 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.89) p = 0.004), than inpatient surgery. There were no significant differences in the rates of reoperation or mortality. The overall rate of successful same-day discharge for day-case surgery was 85% (95% CI 81 to 88). Patient-reported outcome measures and cost-effectiveness were either equal or favoured day-case. Conclusion. Within the limitations of the literature, in particular the substantial risk of selection bias, the outcomes following day-case knee and hip replacement appear not to be inferior to those following an inpatient stay. The evidence is more robust for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) than for total knee replacement (TKR) or total hip replacement (THR). The rate of successful same-day discharge is highest in UKR, followed by TKR and comparatively lower in THR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1385–1392

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

Aims. During total knee replacement (TKR), surgeons can choose whether or not to resurface the patella, with advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Recently, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended always resurfacing the patella, rather than never doing so. NICE found insufficient evidence on selective resurfacing (surgeon’s decision based on intraoperative findings and symptoms) to make recommendations. If effective, selective resurfacing could result in optimal individualized patient care. This protocol describes a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of primary TKR with always patellar resurfacing compared to selective patellar resurfacing. Methods. The PAtellar Resurfacing Trial (PART) is a patient- and assessor-blinded multicentre, pragmatic parallel two-arm randomized superiority trial of adults undergoing elective primary TKR for primary osteoarthritis at NHS hospitals in England, with an embedded internal pilot phase (ISRCTN 33276681). Participants will be randomly allocated intraoperatively on a 1:1 basis (stratified by centre and implant type (cruciate-retaining vs cruciate-sacrificing)) to always resurface or selectively resurface the patella, once the surgeon has confirmed sufficient patellar thickness for resurfacing and that constrained implants are not required. The primary analysis will compare the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) one year after surgery. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported outcome measures at three months, six months, and one year (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, OKS, EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, patient satisfaction, postoperative complications, need for further surgery, resource use, and costs). Cost-effectiveness will be measured for the lifetime of the patient. Overall, 530 patients will be recruited to obtain 90% power to detect a four-point difference in OKS between the groups one year after surgery, assuming up to 40% resurfacing in the selective group. Conclusion. The trial findings will provide evidence about the clinical and cost-effectiveness of always patellar resurfacing compared to selective patellar resurfacing. This will inform future NICE guidelines on primary TKR and the role of selective patellar resurfacing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(6):464–478

Stiffness is reported in up to 16% of patients after total knee replacement (TKR). 1. Treatment of stiffness after TKR remains a challenge. Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) accounts for between 6%-36% of readmissions following TKR. 2,3. The outcomes of MUA remain variable/unpredictable. Post-operative CPM is used as an adjuvant to MUA, potentially offering improved ROM, however, remains the subject of debate. We report a retrospective study comparing MUA with and without post-operative CPM. In our institution patients undergoing MUA to receive CPM post-operatively. Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic hospital admissions were limited. During this period MUA procedures were undertaken without CPM. Two cohorts were included: 1) MUA + post-operative CPM 2) Daycase MUA. Patients’ demographics, pre-manipulation ROM, post-MUA ROM, and ROM at final follow-up were recorded. Between 2017-2022 126 patients underwent MUA and were admitted for CPM and 42 had daycase MUA. The median Age was 66.5 and 64% were female. 57% had extension deficit (>5. o. ), 70% had flexion deficit (< 90. o. ), and 37% had both. The mean Pre-operative ROM was 72.3. o. (SD:18.3. o. ) vs. 68.5. o. (19.0. o. ), ROM at MUA was 95.5. o. (SD:20.7. o. ) vs 108.3. o. (SD:14.1. o. ) [p< 0.01], and at final follow-up 87.4. o. (SD:21.9. o. ) vs. 92.1. o. (SD:18.2. o. ) for daycase and CPM groups respectively. At final follow-up for the daycase and CPM groups respectively 10% vs. 7% improved, 29% vs. 13% maintained, and 57% vs. 79% regressed from the ROM achieved at MUA. The mean percentage of ROM gained at MUA maintained at final follow-up was 92%(SD:17) and 85%(SD:14)[p=0.03] for daycase and CPM groups respectively. There was no significant difference in ROM achieved at final follow-up despite the significantly greater improvement in ROM achieved at MUA for the CPM group. The CPM group lost a greater ROM after MUA (15% vs. 8%). We conclude that post-operative CPM does not improve ROM achieved after MUA

Abstract. Objectives. Stiffness is reported in 4%–16% of patients after having undergone total knee replacement (TKR). Limitation to range of motion (ROM) can limit a patient's ability to undertake activities of daily living with a knee flexion of 83. o. , 93. o. , and 106. o. required to walk up stairs, sit on a chair, and tie one's shoelaces respectively. The treatment of stiffness after TKR remains a challenge. Many treatment options are described for treating the stiff TKR. In addition to physiotherapy the most employed of these is manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA). MUA accounts for up to 36% of readmissions following TKR. Though frequently undertaken the outcomes of MUA remain variable and unpredictable. CPM as an adjuvant therapy to MUA remains the subject of debate. Combining the use of CPM after MUA in theory adds the potential benefits of CPM to those of MUA potentially offering greater improvements in ROM. This paper reports a retrospective study comparing patients who underwent MUA with and without post-operative CPM. Methods. Standard practice in our institution is for patients undergoing MUA for stiff TKR to receive CPM for between 12–24hours post-operatively. Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic hospital admissions were limited. During this period several MUA procedures were undertaken without subsequent inpatient CPM. We retrospectively identified two cohorts of patients treated for stiff TKR: group 1) MUA + post-operative CPM 2) Daycase MUA. All patients had undergone initial physiotherapy to try and improve their ROM prior to proceeding to MUA. In addition to patients’ demographics pre-manipulation ROM, post-MUA ROM, and ROM at final follow-up were recorded for each patient. Results. In total 168 patients who had undergone MUA between 2017–2022 were identified with a median Age of 66.5 years and 64% female. 57% had extension deficit (>5. o. ), 70% had flexion deficit (< 90. o. ), and 37% had both. 42 had daycase MUA without CPM and the remaining 126 were admitted for post-operative CPM. The mean Pre-operative ROM was 72.3. o. (SD:18.3. o. ) and 68.5. o. (19.0. o. ) for the daycase and CPM groups respectively. The mean ROM recorded at MUA was 95.5. o. (SD:20.7. o. ) and 108.3. o. (SD:14.1. o. ) [p<0.01] and at final follow-up was 87.4o (SD:21.9o) and 92.1o (SD:18.2o) for daycase and CPM groups respectively. At final follow-up for the daycase and CPM groups respectively 10% vs. 7% improved, 29% vs. 13% maintained, and 57% vs. 79% regressed from the ROM achieved at MUA. The mean percentage of ROM gained at MUA maintained at final follow-up was 92% (SD:17%) and 85% (SD:14%) [p=0.03] for daycase and CPM groups respectively. Conclusion. Overall, there was no significant difference in ROM achieved at final follow-up despite the significantly greater improvement in ROM achieved at MUA for the CPM group. Analysis of the percentage ROM gained at MUA maintained at follow up showed that most patients regressed from ROM achieved at MUA in both groups with those in the CPM only maintaining 85% as opposed to 92% in the daycase patients. It is our observation that post-operative CPM does not improve ROM achieved after MUA as compared to MUA alone. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Abstract. Introduction. Component mal-positioning in total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) can increase the risk of revision for various reasons. Compared to conventional surgery, relatively improved accuracy of implant positioning can be achieved using computer assisted technologies including navigation, patient-specific jigs, and robotic systems. However, it is not known whether application of these technologies has improved prosthesis survival in the real-world. This study aimed to compare risk of revision for all-causes following primary THR and TKR, and revision for dislocation following primary THR performed using computer assisted technologies compared to conventional technique. Methods. We performed an observational study using National Joint Registry data. All adult patients undergoing primary THR and TKR for osteoarthritis between 01/04/2003 to 31/12/2020 were eligible. Patients who received metal-on-metal bearing THR were excluded. We generated propensity score weights, using Sturmer weight trimming, based on: age, gender, ASA grade, side, operation funding, year of surgery, approach, and fixation. Specific additional variables included position and bearing for THR and patellar resurfacing for TKR. For THR, effective sample sizes and duration of follow up for conventional versus computer-guided and robotic-assisted analyses were 9,379 and 10,600 procedures, and approximately 18 and 4 years, respectively. For TKR, effective sample sizes and durations of follow up for conventional versus computer-guided, patient-specific jigs, and robotic-assisted groups were 92,579 procedures over 18 years, 11,665 procedures over 8 years, and 644 procedures over 3 years, respectively. Outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and expressed using hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results. For THR, analysis comparing computer-guided versus conventional technique demonstrated HR of 0.771 (95%CI 0.573–1.036) p=0.085, and 0.594 (95%CI 0.297–1.190) p=0.142, for revision for all-causes and dislocation, respectively. When comparing robotic-assisted versus conventional technique, HR for revision for all-causes was 0.480 (95%CI 0.067 –3.452) p=0.466. For TKR, compared to conventional surgery, HR for all-cause revision for procedures performed using computer guidance and patient-specific jigs were 0.967 (95% CI 0.888–1.052) p=0.430, and 0.937 (95% CI 0.708–1.241) p=0.65, respectively. HR for analysis comparing robotic-assisted versus conventional technique was 2.0940 (0.2423, 18.0995) p = 0.50. Conclusions. This is the largest study investigating this topic utilising propensity score analysis methods. We did not find a statistically significant difference in revision for all-causes and dislocation although these analyses are underpowered to detect smaller differences in effect size between groups. Additional comparison for revision for dislocation between robotic-assisted versus conventionally performed THR was not performed as this is a subset of revision for all-causes and wide confidence intervals were already observed for that analysis. It is also important to mention this NJR analysis study is of an observational study design which has inherent limitations. Nonetheless, this is the most feasible study design to answer this research question requiring use of a large data set due to revision being a rare outcome. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Orthopaedic surgery is a practical surgical specialization field, the exit exam for registrars remains written and oral. Despite logbook evaluation and surgical work-based assessments, the question remains: can registrars perform elective surgery upon qualification? In South Africa, obstacles to elective surgical training include the trauma workload, financial constraints, fellowships and the Covid pandemic. In hip and knee arthroplasty, new approaches like the direct anterior approach (DAA) and robotic-assisted knee surgery also contributed to the dilution of cases available for registrar training. There are concerns that orthopaedic registrars do not perform enough cases to achieve surgical proficiency. Review of the last 4 years of registrar logbooks in hip and knee arthroplasty surgery performed in a single tertiary academic hospital in South Africa. We included all primary total hip replacements (THR), total knee replacements (TKR) and hemiarthroplasties (HA) done for neck of femur (NOF) fractures between 1 April 2019 and 30 March 2023. Differentiation between registrar assisting, registrar performing with consultant supervision and registrar performing independent surgery was done. 990 hip arthroplasties (472 Primary THR, 216 NOF THR, 302 NOF HA) and 316 Primary TKR were performed during the study period. In primary elective THR the posterior approach was dominant and used in 76% of cases. In NOF THA the DAA was dominant used in 98% of cases. Primary TKR robotic-assisted technologies was used in 27% (n=94) cases. Registrars as the primary surgeon were the highest in NOF THA at 70% of cases and the lowest performing TKR at 25%. During 3-month rotations, an average registrar performed 12 (2 TKR and 10 THR) and assisted in 35 (10 TKR and 25 THR) cases. Despite the large number of arthroplasties operations being performed over the last 4-year period, the surgical cases done by registrars are below, the proposed minimal cases to provide surgical proficiency during their training period

There is little published literature to support the claim that a successful total knee replacement (TKR) is predictive of future good outcomes on the contralateral side. The objective was to identify whether outcome from the first of staged TKRs could be used to predict the outcome of the contralateral TKR. This was a retrospective cohort study of 1687 patients over a 25-year period undergoing staged bilateral TKRs in a UK arthroplasty centre. A control group of 1687 patients undergoing unilateral TKR with matched characteristics was identified. Primary outcomes were satisfaction and Knee Society Score (KSS) at one year. Preoperative status was comparable for pain, ROM and KSS (mean 41, 45, 43±14). At one year follow up, dissatisfaction was similar for all groups (4% first of staged TKR, 4% second of staged TKR, 5% controls). If the first TKR had a good outcome, the relative risk of a contralateral bad outcome was 20% less than controls (95% CI 0.6–1.2). If the first TKR had a poor outcome, the risk of a second poor outcome was 4 times higher (95% CI 2.8–6.1), increasing from 6% to 27% (absolute risk). Patients undergoing the second of staged TKRs with a previous good outcome are likely to do well in their second procedure (94 in 100 will go on to have a second good outcome). Of those with a previous poor outcome, 27 in 100 will have a second poor outcome. The trend was persistent despite correcting for gender, age, BMI, and diagnosis

Abstract. Introduction. Approximately 15–20% of patients report chronic pain three months after total knee replacement (TKR). The STAR care pathway is a clinically important and cost-effective personalised intervention for patients with pain 3 months after TKR. The pathway comprises screening, assesment, onward referral for treatment and follow-up over one year. In a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the pathway with usual care, the pathway improved pain at 6 and 12 months. This study examined the longer-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of the STAR care pathway. Methodology. STAR trial participants were followed-up at a median of 4 years post-randomisation. Co-primary outcomes were self-reported pain severity and interference in the replaced knee, assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Resource use from electronic hospital records was valued with UK reference costs. Results. Of the 337 participants active at trial completion, 326 had confirmed vital status, and 226 (69%) provided outcome data at a median of 4 years. The between-group difference in mean BPI severity score was −0.42 (95% CI −1.07, 0.23; p=0.20) and for BPI interference was −0.64 (95% CI −1.41, 0.12; p=0.10), favouring the intervention. Multiple imputation analyses led to attenuations of about 0.2 points. Mean hospital admission costs over four years were £2461.49 (95% CI £1354.42, £3568.57) in the intervention arm and £3791.68 (95% CI £2095.12, to £5488.24) in usual care. Conclusion. These data are consistent with sustained benefits from the STAR care pathway at 4 years, albeit attenuated and with wider confidence intervals, in part attributable to attrition after 1 year

Abstract. INTRODUCTION. 10% of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) have disease confined to the patellofemoral joint (PFJ). The main surgical options are total knee replacement (TKR) and PFJ replacement (PFJR). PFJR has advantages over TKR, including being less invasive, bone preserving, allowing faster recovery and better function and more ‘straight forward’ revision surgery. We aim to compare the clinical results of revised PFJR with primary TKR taking into consideration the survival length of the PFJR. METHODOLOGY. Twenty-five patients (21 female) were retrospectively identified from our arthroplasty database who had undergone revision from PFJR to TKR (2006–2019). These patients were then matched with regards to their age at their primary procedure, sex and total arthroplasty life (primary PFJ survival + Revision PFJ time to follow up) up to point of follow-up with a group of primary TKRs implanted at the same point as the primary PFJR. RESULTS. Mean survival of the PFJs revised were 4.2 years. In the PFJR revision group (mean arthroplasty life 7.8 years) mean Oxford knee score (OKS) at latest follow up was 27.8. In the primary knee group (mean arthroplasty life 7.5 years) mean OKS was 32.4. This difference was not statistically significant. All PFJR revisions were performed using primary prostheses. CONCLUSION. PFJR provides comparable clinical outcome even after revision surgery to TKR as primary TKRs at midterm follow up and should be considered in all patients meeting the selection criteria. Given comparable proms and straight forward revisions, staged arthroplasty to preserve bone-stock is a reasonable choice

Abstract. Introduction. The rate of day-case total knee replacement (TKR) in the UK is currently ~0.5%. Reducing length of stay improves efficiency, increases operative throughput and tackles the rising demand for joint replacement surgery and the COVID-19 related backlog. We report safe delivery of day-case TKR in an NHS Trust via inpatient wards, with no additional resources. Methodology. Day-case TKRs, defined as patients discharged on the same calendar day as surgery, were retrospectively reviewed with a minimum follow-up of six-months. Analysis of hospital and primary care records was performed to determine readmission and reattendance rates. Telephone interviews were conducted to determine patient satisfaction. Results. Between 2016 and 2021, 301/7350 (4.1%) TKRs were discharged on the day of surgery. Mean follow-up was 31.4 (6.2–70.0) months. 28 (9.3%) patients attended Accident and Emergency or other acute care settings within 90-days of surgery; six (2.0%) patients were readmitted. No patients underwent a subsequent revision procedure. There were no prosthetic infections. Two patients underwent secondary patella resurfacing, and one patient underwent arthroscopic arthrolysis after previous manipulation under anaesthetic (MUA). Three patients underwent MUA alone. Primary care consultation records, available for 206 patients, showed 16 (7.8%) patients contacted their General Practitioner within two-weeks post-operatively; two (1.0%) were referred to secondary care. 115/121 (95%) patients telephoned stated they would have day-case TKR again. Conclusion. Day-case TKR can be safely delivered in the NHS with no additional resources. We found low incidence of contact with primary and secondary care in the post-operative period, and high patient satisfaction

Abstract. INTRODUCTION. This study aimed to examine how physical activity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) evolved over the first year after total knee replacement (TKR) for patients with and without post-operative chronic knee pain. METHODS. 83 adults participating in the PEP-TALK, a RCT testing the effectiveness of a behaviour change physiotherapy intervention versus usual rehabilitation post-primary TKR, were analysed. UCLA Activity Score and EQ-5D-5L values for participants with and without chronic knee pain (14 points or lower in the Oxford Knee Score Pain Subscale at six months post-TKR) were compared at six and 12 months post-TKR. We evaluated recovery trajectory those with or without chronic pain at these time points. RESULTS. Participants with chronic knee pain, UCLA Activity Score remained unchanged between baseline to six months (mean: 3.8 to 3.8), decreasing at 12 months (mean: 3.0). Those without post-operative chronic knee pain reported a improvement in physical activity from baseline to six months (mean: 4.0 vs 4.9), plateauing at 12 months (mean: 4.9). Participants with chronic knee pain reported lower baseline HRQoL, although both groups improved mean health utility over one year. Of participants who were not defined as being in chronic pain at six months, 8.5% returned to a chronic pain categorisation by 12 months. CONCLUSION. People with chronic knee pain post-TKR report poorer physical activity and HRQoL scores post-operatively. Monitoring outcomes longer than six months may be indicated as those without chronic knee pain initially post-TKR remain at risk of reverting to chronic knee pain 12 months post-TKR

Abstract. Introduction. The optimal alignment technique for total knee replacement (TKR) remains controversial. We previously reported six-month and two-year results of a randomized controlled trial comparing kinematically (KA) versus mechanically (MA) aligned TKR. In the present study, we report 12-year results from this trial. Methods. The original cohort included 88 TKRs (44 KA using Shape Match patient-specific guides and 44 MA using conventional instrumentation), performed from 2008 to 2009. After IRB approval, the health record of the original 88 patients were queried. Revisions, re-operations, and complications were recorded. The non-deceased patients were contacted via phone. Reoperation and complications were documented via the patient's history. Further, a battery of patient-reported outcome measures (including patient satisfaction, WOMAC, Oxford, KOOS Jr, Forgotten Joint Score, and M-SANE) were obtained. Results. Of the original 88 patients in the study, 15 patients had a least one reoperation (17%). Patella problems were the most common cause of reoperation accounting for 5/8 reoperations in the KA group versus 3/7 in the MA group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two alignment methods in terms of major and minor complications or reoperations. At the 12-year follow-up, 26 patients died leaving 62 patients for follow-up. Of these, 48 patients (77%) were successfully contacted. The kinematically aligned total knees self-reported better satisfaction (96% versus 82%), but no difference in other patient-reported outcome measures compared to mechanically aligned TKRs. Conclusion. KA TKR demonstrates excellent mid to long-term results compared to MA TKR with similar reoperations, complications, and patient-reported outcome measures

Abstract. Introduction. Total knee replacement (TKR) aims to reduce pain and functional limitations. Despite a good outcome for many, 15–20% patients report chronic pain three months after TKR. The STAR Care Pathway is a clinically important and cost effective treatment to improve pain outcomes over 1 year for people with chronic pain at 3 months after total knee replacement surgery. The care pathway is delivered by specially trained Extended Scope Practitioners (ESPs). There is a gap between research findings and translation into practice. This work shows how the STAR trial findings were implemented into NHS practice at a single centre and the further work required to enable national implementation. Methodology. Trial findings were presented to NHS managers with a business case for an implementation pilot. Trial documentation was adapted for use in usual care using the COM-B model for behaviour change and evidence-based approaches to increase the return of postal questionnaires. Trial sites were contacted to understand their capacity to implement the intervention locally. Results. The STAR care pathway was successfully implemented into NHS practice with a screening response rate of 83%. It is now permanently part of usual care at North Bristol NHS Trust. Trial centres indicated that lack of availability of STAR trained ESPs as a barrier to implementation. The trial manual and training session were adapted for online delivery in partnership with Health Education England. Conclusion. The STAR care pathway has been successfully embedded into NHS care. A toolkit and online clinician training package enables national implementation

Abstract. Introduction. There is little published literature to support the claim that a successful total knee replacement (TKR) is predictive of future good outcomes on the contralateral side. The objective was to identify whether outcome from the first of staged TKRs could be used to predict the outcome of the contralateral TKR. Methodology. This was a retrospective cohort study of 1687 patients over a 25-year period undergoing staged bilateral TKRs in a UK arthroplasty centre. A control group of 1687 patients undergoing unilateral TKR with matched characteristics was identified. Primary outcomes: satisfaction and Knee Society Score (KSS) at one year. Results. Preoperative status was comparable for pain, ROM and KSS (mean 41, 45, 43±14). At one year, dissatisfaction was similar for all groups (4% first of staged TKR, 4% second of staged TKR, 5% controls). If the first TKR had a good outcome, the relative risk of a contralateral bad outcome was 20% less than controls (95% CI 0.6–1.2). If the first TKR had a poor outcome, the risk of a second poor outcome was 4 times higher (95% CI 2.8–6.1), increasing from 6% to 28% (absolute risk). Conclusion. Patients undergoing the second of staged TKRs with a previous good outcome are likely to do well in their second procedure (94 in 100 will go on to have a second good outcome). Of those with a previous poor outcome, 28 in 100 will have a second poor outcome. The trend was persistent despite correcting for gender, age, BMI, and diagnosis

Abstract. Introduction. Total knee replacement (TKR) is a successful operation for many patients, however 15–20% of patients experience chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP). Many will experience neuropathic characteristics. We describe the prevalence and patterns of neuropathic pain in a cohort of patients with CPSP three months after TKR. Methodology. Between 2016–2019, 363 patients with troublesome pain, ≤14 on Oxford Knee score pain subscale, at three months after TKR from eight NHS hospitals were recruited into the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) trial. Self-reported neuropathic pain was assessed at three, nine and fifteen months after surgery using painDETECT and Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4). Results. At three months post-operative, 53% reported neuropathic pain on painDETECT and 74% on DN4. Half (56%) remained in neuropathic pain over the twelve-month follow-up period, 26% reported improvement, and 9% reported new neuropathic symtpoms or fluctuated in and out of neuropathic pain (9%). Overall mean neuropathic pain scores improved between three and 15 months after TKR. When the painDETECT cut-off score of ≥13(ambiguous/possible) was used, DN4 and painDETECT measures showed similar prevalence rates at each timepoint. Conclusion. Neuropathic pain is common among patients with CPSP at three months after TKR. Although symptoms improved over time, one quarter to one half of our cohort continued to report symptoms at fifteen months. We propose a painDETECT cutoff score of ≥13 be used to identify neuropathic features in the TKR population. Postoperative care should include identification, assessment, and treatment of neuropathic pain in patients with CPSP after TKR

Abstract. Introduction. Total knee replacement (TKR) in patients with skeletal dysplasia is technically challenging surgery due to deformity, joint contracture, and associated co-morbidities. The aim of this study is to follow up patients with skeletal dysplasia following a TKR. Methodology. We retrospectively reviewed 22 patients with skeletal dysplasia who underwent 31 TKRs at our institution between 2006 and 2022. Clinical notes, operative records and radiographic data were reviewed. Results. Achondroplasia was the most common skeletal dysplasia (8), followed by Chondrodysplasia punctata (7) and Spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia (5). There were fourteen men and eight women with mean age of 51 years (28 to 73). The average height of patients was 1.4 metres (1.16–1.75) and the mean weight was 64.8 Kg (34.3–100). The mean follow up duration was 68.32 months (1–161). Three patients died during follow up. Custom implants were required in twelve patients (38.71%). Custom jigs were utilised in six patients and two patients underwent robotic assisted surgery. Hinged TKR was used in seventeen patients (54.84%), posterior stabilised TKR in nine patients (29.03%), and cruciate retaining TKR in five patients (16.13%). One patient underwent a patella resurfacing for persistent anterior knee pain and another had an intra-operative medial tibial plateau fracture which was managed with fixation. No revisions occurred during the follow up period. Conclusion. Despite the technical challenges and complexity of TKR within this unique patient group, we demonstrate good implant survivorship during the study period. Cross sectional imaging is recommended preoperatively for precise planning and templating

Introduction. Transtibial osseointegration (TFOI) for amputees has limited but clear literature identifying superior quality of life and mobility versus a socketed prosthesis. Some amputees have knee arthritis that would be relieved by a total knee replacement (TKR). No other group has reported performing a TKR in association with TTOI (TKR+TTOI). We report the outcomes of nine patients who had TKR+TTOI, followed for an average 6.5 years. Materials & Methods. Our osseointegration registry was retrospectively reviewed to identify all patients who had TTOI and who also had TKR, performed at least two years prior. Four patients had TKR first the TTOI, four patients had simultaneous TKR+TTOI, and one patient had 1 OI first then TKR. All constructs were in continuity from hinged TKR to the prosthetic limb. Outcomes were: complications prompting surgical intervention, and changes in daily prosthesis wear hours, Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (QTFA), and Short Form 36 (SF36). All patients had clinical follow-up, but two patients did not have complete survey and mobility tests at both time periods. Results. Six (67%) were male, average age 51.2±14.7 years. All primary amputations were performed to manage traumatic injury or its sequelae. No patients died. Five patients (56%) developed infection leading to eventual transfemoral amputation 36.0±15.3 months later, and 1 patient had a single debridement six years after TTOI with no additional surgery in the subsequent two years. All patients who had transfemoral amputation elected for and received transfemoral osseointegration, and no infections occurred, although one patient sustained a periprosthetic fracture which was managed with internal fixation and implant retention and walks independently. The proportion of patients who wore their prosthesis at least 8 hours daily was 5/9=56%, versus 7/9=78% (p=.620). Even after proximal level amputation, the QTFA scores improved versus prior to TKR+TTOI, although not significantly: Global (45.2±20.3 vs 66.7±27.6, p=.179), Problem (39.8±19.8 vs 21.5±16.8, p=.205), Mobility (54.8±28.1 vs 67.7±25.0, p=.356). SF36 changes were also non-significant: Mental (58.6±7.0 vs 46.1±11.0, p=.068), Physical (34.3±6.1 vs 35.2±13.7, p=.904). Conclusions. TKR+TTOI presents a high risk for eventual infection prompting subsequent transfemoral amputation. Although none of these patients died, in general, TKR infection can lead to patient mortality. Given the exceptional benefit to preserving the knee joint to preserve amputee mobility and quality of life, it would be devastating to flatly force transtibial amputees with severe degenerative knee joint pain and unable to use a socket prosthesis to choose between TTOI but a painful knee, or preemptive transfemoral amputation for transfemoral osseointegration. Therefore, TTOI for patients who also request TKR must be considered cautiously. Given that this frequency of infection does not occur in patients who have total hip replacement in association with transfemoral osseointegration, the underlying issue may not be that linked joint replacement with osseointegrated limb replacement is incompatible, but may require further consideration of biological barriers to ascending infection and/or significant changes to implant design, surgical technique, or other yet-uncertain factors

To determine risk factors of infection in total knee arthroplasty. This descriptive study was conducted in the Department of Orthopedics for a duration of three years from January 2016 to January 2019. All patients undergoing primary total knee replacement were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were all patients operated in another hospital and revision total knee replacement. All patients were followed up at 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 weeks post-operatively. Signs of inflammation and inflammatory markers such as total leukocyte count (TLC), C-reactive protein (CRP) and ESR were measured. Risk factors like age, body mass index (BMI), ASA, co-morbid conditions were also noted. A total of 78 patients underwent primary unilateral Total Knee Replacement (TKR) during the study period. Of these, 30 (34.09%) were male and 48 (61.54%) female patients. Mean age of patients was 68.32 ± 8.54 years. Average BMI 25.89 Kg/m2 .Osteoarthritis was the pre-dominant cause of total knee replacement (94.87%). Among co-morbid factors 33.33% were diabetic, 28.20% having ischemic heart disease and 12.82% with chronic lung disease. Upon anaesthesia fitness pre-operatively, 91.02% patients had an American society of anaesthesiologist score (ASA) between 0–2 while 07 (8.97%) between 3- 5. Average duration of surgery was 85.62± 4.11 minutes. 6.41% cases got infected. In majority of the infected cases (60%), Staphylococcus aureus was the infective organism. Diabetes Mellitus (p=0.01) and Obesity (p=0.02) had a significant relation to post-operative infection. Pre-operative risk evaluation and prevention strategies along with early recognition of infection and control can greatly reduce the risk of joint infection post-TKR which will not only improve the mobility of patient but also its morbidity and mortality as well. Key Words:. C-reactive protein (CRP), Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), Staphylococcus aureus, Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA)