Project description:BackgroundHip and knee arthroplasties are common and successful procedures, however, success and durability are not guaranteed. The revision burden, defined as the ratio of implant revisions to the total number of arthroplasties in a specific period, is a measure of the steady state of arthroplasty success in a given registry. This study examines the hypothesis that revision burden would be similar among contemporary joint replacement registries and improving over time compared with historic controls.MethodsWe evaluated the national joint registries of 5 health systems (Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry [AOANJRR]; National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man; New Zealand Joint Registry [NZJR]; Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register [SHAR] and Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register [SKAR]; and the American Joint Replacement Registry [AJRR]) for hip and knee revision burden over the past 4 years or since registry inception. Historic controls were obtained from previously published reports.ResultsThe 2014 hip revision burden varied from 9.7 percent (NJR) to 11.9 percent (NZJR), and the unweighted average was 10.4 percent. The 2011, 2012, and 2013 mean hip revision burden was 11.9, 11.9, and 11.4 percent. The 2014 knee revision burden varied from to 6.0 percent (NJR) to 8.1 percent (AJRR), and the unweighted average for the 5 registries studied was 7.0 percent. The 2011, 2012, and 2013 mean knee revision burden was 6.9, 7.0, and 7.0 percent. Historically, the observed hip revision burden was 15.8 percent and the knee revision burden 8.0 percent.ConclusionsRevision burden has gradually decreased for hip replacements and has remained relatively constant for knee replacements both for the last 4 years and compared to historic controls. Knee revision burden was lower than hip revision burden for each period examined. Revision burden is one measure that may be helpful in following the effect of changes in surgical technique and implant design over time in registry populations and may be a helpful way to compare overall results between registries.

Project description:ImportanceThe 2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline concluded that obesity alone should not delay joint replacement. Therefore, a substantially increased utilization of joint replacement among patients with obesity could be expected. However, patients with obesity are at increased risk of revision, posing unique challenges as the surgery is complex and costly, and it remains unknown whether postoperative weight loss could decrease the risk of revision.ObjectiveTo examine the association of the proportion of postoperative weight loss following antiobesity medication use with the risk of revision among patients with obesity undergoing hip or knee replacement.Design, setting, and participantsUsing a target trial emulation, a causal inference framework, this retrospective cohort study investigated patients with obesity who underwent hip or knee replacement. Data were from the IQVIA Medical Research Database (2000-2023). Statistical analysis was performed from October 2023 to June 2024.Main outcomes and measuresEmulated analyses of a hypothetical target trial were assessed for the association of small-to-moderate (2%-10%) or large (≥10%) weight loss after initiating antiobesity medications (orlistat, sibutramine, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and rimonabant) within 1 year with the risk of 5-year and 10-year revision after initiation of antiobesity medications.ResultsAmong 3691 qualified participants (mean [SD] age, 64.7 [9.3] years; 2322 [62.9%] women), the 5-year risks of revision were 5.6%, 4.4%, and 3.7% for weight gain or stable, small-to-moderate weight loss, and large weight loss groups, respectively. Compared with the weight gain or stable group, the hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.55-1.04) for the small-to-moderate weight loss group and 0.57 (95% CI, 0.36-0.91) for the large weight loss group. Similar results were observed when the analyses were performed separately for hip or knee replacement. The HRs for revision were 0.55 (95% CI, 0.32-0.93) for small-to-moderate weight loss and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.25-0.97) for large weight loss groups compared with the weight gain or stable group in patients undergoing knee replacement; the corresponding HRs for revision were 0.82 (95% CI, 0.54-1.25) and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.30-0.93) in patients undergoing hip replacement. Consistent findings were obtained regarding the association of weight loss with the 10-year risks after initiating antiobesity medications.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study using a target trial emulation, a higher proportion of weight loss after initiating antiobesity medications within 1 year was associated with a lower risk of 5-year and 10-year revision among patients with obesity undergoing joint replacement. These results suggest that antiobesity medication use, with relatively safe and sustainable weight loss, may be an effective strategy for improving implant survivorship of hip and knee replacements in the obese population.

Project description:BackgroundRevision arthroplasty surgery is often complicated by loss of bone stock that can be managed by the use of bone allograft. The allograft provides immediate stability for the revision implant but may be resorbed, impairing subsequent implant stability. Bisphosphonates can delay allograft resorption. We hypothesized that zoledronate-impregnated allograft impacted around revision implants would improve implant fixation as characterized by mechanical push-out testing and histomorphometry.MethodsTwenty-four axially pistoning micromotion devices were inserted bilaterally into the knees of twelve dogs according to our revision protocol. This produced a standardized revision cavity with a loose implant, fibrous tissue, and a sclerotic bone rim. Revision surgery was performed eight weeks later; after stable titanium revision components were implanted, saline solution-soaked allograft was impacted around the component on the control side and allograft soaked in 0.005 mg/mL zoledronate was impacted on the intervention side. The results were evaluated after four weeks.ResultsThe zoledronate treatment resulted in a 30% increase in ultimate shear strength (p = 0.023), a 54% increase in apparent shear stiffness (p = 0.002), and a 12% increase in total energy absorption (p = 0.444). The quantity of allograft in the gap was three times greater in the zoledronate group compared with the control group (p < 0.001). The volume fraction of new bone in the zoledronate group (25%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 22% to 28%) was similar to that in the control group (23%; 95% CI, 19% to 26%) (p = 0.311).ConclusionsThe data obtained in this canine model suggest that pretreating allograft with zoledronate may be beneficial for early stability of grafted revision arthroplasty implants, without any adverse effect on bone formation. Clinical studies are warranted.Clinical relevanceThe zoledronate treatment is simple to apply in the clinical setting. The treatment could increase early stability of revision joint replacements without impairing new bone formation. In the long term, this can potentially improve the longevity of revision joint replacements and reduce the number of subsequent revisions.

Project description:BackgroundProsthetic joint infection (PJI) is a challenging complication of total elbow replacement (TER). Potential surgical treatments include one- or two-stage revision; however, the best treatment for elbow PJI is not clearly defined. We conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines to compare the clinical effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision surgery for elbow PJI using re-infection (recurrent and new infections) rates; mortality; clinical measures of function, pain, and satisfaction; and non-infection related adverse events.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library were searched up to June 2019 to identify observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that had recruited patients with elbow PJI following TER and treated with one- or two-stage revision. Of 96 retrieved articles, 2 one-stage and 6 two-stage revision studies were eligible. No RCT was identified. Arcsine transformation was used in estimating rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsStaphylococcus aureus was the most common causative organism for PJI of the elbow (24 of 71 elbow PJIs). The re-infection rate (95% CI) for one-stage (7 elbows) ranged from 0.0% (0.0-79.3) to 16.7% (3.0-56.4) and that for two-stage revision (87 elbows) from 0.0% (0.0-49.0) to 20.0% (3.6-62.4). Non-infection related adverse event rate for one-stage (based on a single study) was 16.7% (3.0-56.4) and that for two-stage ranged from 11.8% (4.7-26.6) to 20.0% (3.6-62.4). There were no mortality events recorded following one- or two-stage revision surgery and postoperative clinical measures of function, pain, and satisfaction could not be effectively compared because of limited data.ConclusionsNo strong conclusions can be drawn because of limited data. The one-stage revision may be potentially at least as clinically effective as two-stage revision, but further data is needed. There are clear gaps in the existing literature and studies are urgently warranted to assess the clinical effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision strategies for PJI following TER.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO 2018: CRD42018118002 .

Project description:ObjectivesThe association of joint replacement registries with outcomes such as revision burden is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate whether joint replacement registries are associated with the burden of revision changes while controlling for confounders that could affect the association.DesignA longitudinal study involving a combination of cross-sectional and time series data from 1980 to 2018. The study was a panel regression analysis using the difference-in-difference method.SettingData from countries with joint replacement registries and countries without joint replacement registries were used. Registry data were obtained from joint replacement registries' annual reports, while non-registry data were obtained from each included country's pooled hospitals' annual revision burden reported in the literature.Outcome measuresChanges in revision burden from 1980 to 2018 was the outcome measure. The revision burden in the registry periods of registry countries was compared with the non-registry periods of registry and non-registry countries.ResultsData were obtained from 12 registry periods and 8 non-registry periods. The average difference in revision burden in the registry periods of registry countries relative to the non-registry periods of registry and non-registry countries was statistically significant for hip, -3.80 (95% CI (-2.50 to -5.10); p<0.001) percentage points and knee, -1.63 (95% CI (-1.00 to -2.30); p<0.001) percentage points. This translates to a 19.30%, and 21.85% reduction in revision burden for hip and knee registries, for the whole sampling period.ConclusionJoint replacement registries are associated with a significant reduction in the burden of revision. Although revision burden reduces over time even without the registries, the establishment of joint replacement registries is associated with an increased reduction. The establishment of joint replacement registries in non-registry countries would be a worthwhile decision as it will further improve the outcomes of arthroplasty surgeries.

Project description:ImportanceMedicare recently concluded a national voluntary payment demonstration, Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) model 3, in which skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) assumed accountability for patients' Medicare spending for 90 days from initial SNF admission. There is little evidence on outcomes associated with this novel payment model.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of BPCI model 3 with spending, health care utilization, and patient outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries undergoing lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR).Design, setting, and participantsObservational difference-in-difference analysis using Medicare claims from 2013-2017 to evaluate the association of BPCI model 3 with outcomes for 80 648 patients undergoing LEJR. The preintervention period was from January 2013 through September 2013, which was 9 months prior to enrollment of the first BPCI cohort. The postintervention period extended from 3 months post-BPCI enrollment for each SNF through December 2017. BPCI SNFs were matched with control SNFs using propensity score matching on 2013 SNF characteristics.ExposuresAdmission to a BPCI model 3-participating SNF.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was institutional spending, a combination of postacute care and hospital Medicare-allowed payments. Additional outcomes included other categories of spending, changes in case mix, admission volume, home health use, length of stay, and hospital use within 90 days of SNF admission.ResultsThere were 448 BPCI SNFs with 18 870 LEJR episodes among 16 837 patients (mean [SD] age, 77.5 [9.4] years; 12 173 [72.3%] women) matched with 1958 control SNFs with 72 005 LEJR episodes among 63 811 patients (mean [SD] age, 77.6 [9.4] years; 46 072 [72.2%] women) in the preintervention and postintervention periods. Seventy-nine percent of matched BPCI SNFs were for-profit facilities, 85% were located in an urban area, and 85% were part of a larger corporate chain. There were no systematic changes in patient case mix or episode volume between BPCI-participating SNFs and controls during the program. Institutional spending decreased from $17 956 to $15 746 in BPCI SNFs and from $17 765 to $16 563 in matched controls, a differential decrease of 5.6% (-$1008 [95% CI, -$1603 to -$414]; P < .001). This decrease was related to a decline in SNF days per beneficiary (from 26.2 to 21.3 days in BPCI SNFs and from 26.3 to 23.4 days in matched controls; differential change, -2.0 days [95% CI, -2.9 to -1.1]). There was no significant change in mortality or 90-day readmissions.Conclusions and relevanceAmong Medicare patients undergoing lower extremity joint replacement from 2013-2017, the BPCI model 3 was significantly associated with a decrease in mean institutional spending on episodes initiated by admission to SNFs. Further research is needed to assess bundled payments in other clinical contexts.

Dataset Information

Reversal of the Halo Effect: Prolonged Participation in Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Negatively Impacts Revision Metrics

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets