Tranexamic acid (TXA) is proven to reduce blood loss following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but there are limited data on the impact of similar dosing regimens in revision TKA. The purpose of this multicentre randomized clinical trial was to determine the optimal regimen to maximize the blood-sparing properties of TXA in revision TKA. From six-centres, 233 revision TKAs were randomized to one of four regimens: 1 g of intravenous (IV) TXA given prior to the skin incision, a double-dose regimen of 1 g IV TXA given both prior to skin incision and at time of wound closure, a combination of 1 g IV TXA given prior to skin incision and 1 g of intraoperative topical TXA, or three doses of 1950 mg oral TXA given two hours preoperatively, six hours postoperatively, and on the morning of postoperative day one. Randomization was performed based on the type of revision procedure to ensure equivalent distribution among groups. Power analysis determined that 40 patients per group were necessary to identify a 1 g/dl difference in the reduction of haemoglobin postoperatively between groups with an alpha of 0.05 and power of 0.80. Per-protocol analysis involved regression analysis and two one-sided Aims
Patients and Methods
The outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) depend on many factors. The impact of implant design on patient-reported outcomes is unknown. Our goal was to evaluate the patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction after primary TKA in patients with osteoarthritis undergoing primary TKA using five different brands of posterior-stabilized implant. Using our institutional registry, we identified 4135 patients who underwent TKA using one of the five most common brands of implant. These included Biomet Vanguard (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana) in 211 patients, DePuy/Johnson & Johnson Sigma (DePuy Synthes, Raynham, Massachusetts) in 222, Exactech Optetrak Logic (Exactech, Gainesville, Florida) in 1508, Smith & Nephew Genesis II (Smith & Nephew, London, United Kingdom) in 1415, and Zimmer NexGen (Zimmer Biomet) in 779 patients. Patients were evaluated preoperatively using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS), and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12). Demographics including age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anethesiologists status, sex, and smoking status were collected. Postoperatively, two-year KOOS, LEAS, SF-12, and satisfaction scores were compared between groups.Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface damage, the density of crosslinking, and oxidation in retrieved antioxidant-stabilized highly crosslinked polyethylene (A-XLPE) tibial inserts from total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and to compare the results with a matched cohort of standard remelted highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) inserts. A total of 19 A-XLPE tibial inserts were retrieved during revision TKA and matched to 18 retrieved XLPE inserts according to the demographics of the patients, with a mean length of implantation of 15 months (1 to 42). The percentage areas of PE damage on the articular surfaces and the modes of damage were measured. The density of crosslinking of the PE and oxidation were measured at loaded and unloaded regions on these surfaces.Aims
Materials and Methods
Hip and knee replacements are being performed at increasing rates and currently account for one of the largest procedure expenditures in the Medicare budget. Outcomes of total knee replacement (TKR) depend on surgeon, patient and implant factors. The impact that the specific implants might have on patient-reported outcomes is unknown. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the patient-reported functional outcomes and satisfaction after primary total knee arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis who underwent TKR using five different brands of posterior-stabilized implants. Specifically, the aim was to evaluate for any difference in patient-reported outcomes based on implant brand used. The hypothesis was that there would be no difference in functional outcome that could be attributed to the implant used in primary TKR. Using our institution's total joint arthroplasty registry, we identified 4,135 patients who underwent total knee replacement (TKR) using one of the five most common implant brands used at our institution. These included Biomet Vanguard (N=211 patients), Depuy/Johnson&Johnson Sigma (N=221), Exactech OptetrakLogic (N=1,507), Smith & Nephew Genesis II (N=1,414), and Zimmer NexGen (N=779). Only posterior-stabilized primary TKRs in patients with osteoarthritis were included. Patients were evaluated preoperatively using the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS), and Short Form-12 (SF-12). Demographics including age, body mass index (BMI), Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI), ASA physical status classification, sex, and smoking status were collected. Postoperatively, 2-year KOOS, LEAS, SF-12, and satisfaction scores were compared between implant groups.Introduction
Methods
Tranexamic acid (TXA) is proven to reduce blood loss following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but there are limited data on the impact of similar dosing regimens in revision TKA that is associated with greater blood loss. The purpose of this multi-center randomized trial was to determine the optimal regimen to maximize the blood-sparing properties of TXA in revision TKA. 233 Septic and aseptic revision TKA from six-centers were randomized to either receive 1g pre-incision intravenous (IV) TXA, 1g pre- and post-incision IV TXA, 1g pre-incision IV and 1g intra-operative topical TXA, or three doses of 1950mg oral TXA given 2 hours pre-operatively, 6 hours post-operatively, and the morning of postoperative day 1. Randomization was performed based on type of revision to ensure equivalent distribution among groups. The primary outcome was reduction in hemoglobin. Power analysis determined 40 patients per group were necessary to identify a 1g/dL difference with an alpha of 0.05 and beta of 0.80. Per-protocol analysis involved regression analysis and two one-sided t-tests for equivalence.Introduction
Methods
In a randomised controlled pragmatic trial we
investigated whether local infiltration analgesia would result in earlier
readiness for discharge from hospital after total knee replacement
(TKR) than patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) plus femoral
nerve block. A total of 45 patients with a mean age of 65 years
(49 to 81) received a local infiltration with a peri-articular injection
of bupivacaine, morphine and methylprednisolone, as well as adjuvant
analgesics. In 45 PCEA+femoral nerve blockade patients with a mean
age of 67 years (50 to 84), analgesia included a bupivacaine nerve
block, bupivacaine/hydromorphone PCEA, and adjuvant analgesics.
The mean time until ready for discharge was 3.2 days (1 to 14) in
the local infiltration group and 3.2 days (1.8 to 7.0) in the PCEA+femoral
nerve blockade group. The mean pain scores for patients receiving
local infiltration were higher when walking (p = 0.0084), but there
were no statistically significant differences at rest. The mean
opioid consumption was higher in those receiving local infiltration. The choice between these two analgesic pathways should not be
made on the basis of time to discharge after surgery. Most secondary
outcomes were similar, but PCEA+femoral nerve blockade patients
had lower pain scores when walking and during continuous passive
movement. If PCEA+femoral nerve blockade is not readily available, local
infiltration provides similar length of stay and similar pain scores
at rest following TKR. Cite this article:
