Dataset Information

How long do revised and multiply revised knee replacements last? An analysis of the National Joint Registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Knee replacements are common and effective operations but patients that undergo this intervention are at risk of needing subsequent costly and often complex revision surgery with poorer outcomes than primary surgery. The treatment pathway over the life of the patient in terms of risk of revision and re-revision(s) is poorly described. We aim to provide detailed information on the longevity of revision surgery.

Methods

This was a retrospective observational registry-based study of the National Joint Registry. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine the cumulative probability of revision and subsequent re-revision(s) following primary knee replacement. Analyses were stratified by age and gender and the influence of time from first to second revision on the risk of further revision was explored.

Findings

There were 33,292 revision knee replacements with a linked primary episode. Revision rates of revision knee replacements were higher in males and younger patients. 19·9% of revisions were revised again within 13 years, 20·7% of second revisions were revised again within 5 years and 20·7% of third revisions were revised again within 3 years. A shorter time between revision episodes was associated with earlier subsequent revision.

Interpretation

Males and younger patients are at higher risk of multiple revisions. Patients who undergo a revision have steadily increasing risk of further revision the more procedures they undergo, and each subsequent revision lasts for approximately half the time of the previous one.

Funding

This study was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston National Health Service Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. This study was also supported by funding from Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership and the National Joint Registry. Posts of authors of this work are part funded by a grant from the National Joint Registry to conduct statistical analysis for the National Joint Registry. AS was funded by a Medical Research Council Strategic Skills Fellowship MR/L01226X/1.

SUBMITTER: Deere K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7612217 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundKnee replacements are the mainstay of treatment for end-stage osteoarthritis and are effective. Given time, all knee replacements will fail and knowing when this failure might happen is important. We aimed to establish how long a knee replacement lasts.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE and Embase for case series and cohort studies published from database inception until July 21, 2018. Articles reporting 15 year or greater survival of primary total knee replacement (TKR), unicondylar knee replacement (UKR), and patellofemoral replacements in patients with osteoarthritis were included. Articles that reviewed specifically complex primary surgeries or revisions were excluded. Survival and implant data were extracted, with all-cause survival of the knee replacement construct being the primary outcome. We also reviewed national joint replacement registry reports and extracted the data to be analysed separately. In the meta-analysis, we weighted each series and calculated a pooled survival estimate for each data source at 15 years, 20 years, and 25 years, using a fixed-effects model. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018105188.FindingsFrom 4363 references found by our initial search, we identified 33 case series in 30 eligible articles, which reported all-cause survival for 6490 TKRs (26 case series) and 742 UKRs (seven case series). No case series reporting on patellofemoral replacements met our inclusion criteria, and no case series reported 25 year survival for TKR. The estimated 25 year survival for UKR (based on one case series) was 72·0% (95% CI 58·0-95·0). Registries contributed 299 291 TKRs (47 series) and 7714 UKRs (five series). The pooled registry 25 year survival of TKRs (14 registries) was 82·3% (95% CI 81·3-83·2) and of UKRs (four registries) was 69·8% (67·6-72·1).InterpretationOur pooled registry data, which we believe to be more accurate than the case series data, shows that approximately 82% of TKRs last 25 years and 70% of UKRs last 25 years. These findings will be of use to patients and health-care providers; further information is required to predict exactly how long specific knee replacements will last.FundingThe National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Isle of Man and the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

Project description:ObjectivesTo describe the prevalence rates of revision surgery for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) for patients undergoing knee replacement, their time trends, the cumulative incidence function of revision for PJI and estimate the burden of PJI at health service level.DesignWe analysed revision knee replacements performed due to a diagnosis of PJI and the linked index procedures recorded in the National Joint Registry from 2003 to 2014 for England and Wales. The cohort analysed consisted of 679 010 index primary knee replacements, 33 920 index revision knee replacements and 8247 revision total knee replacements performed due to a diagnosis of PJI. The prevalence rates, their time trends investigated by time from index surgery to revision for PJI, cumulative incidence functions and the burden of PJI (total procedures) were calculated. Overall linear trends were investigated with log-linear regression.ResultsThe incidence of revision total knee replacement due to PJI at 2 years was 3.2/1000 following primary and 14.4/1000 following revision knee replacement, respectively. The prevalence of revision due to PJI in the 3 months following primary knee replacement has risen by 2.5-fold (95% CI 1.2 to 5.3) from 2005 to 2013 and 7.5-fold (95% CI 1.0 to 56.1) following revision knee replacement. Over 1000 procedures per year are performed as a consequence of knee PJI, an increase of 2.8 from 2005 to 2013. Overall, 75% of revisions were two-stage with an increase in use of single-stage from 7.9% in 2005 to 18.8% in 2014.ConclusionsAlthough the risk of revision due to PJI following knee replacement is low, it is rising, and coupled with the established and further predicted increased incidence of both primary and revision knee replacements, this represents an increasing and substantial treatment burden for orthopaedic service delivery in England and Wales. This has implications for future service design and the funding of individual and specialist centres.

Project description:National projections of future joint replacement use can help us understand the changing burden of severe osteoarthritis. This study aimed to compare actual utilisation rates for primary total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) to previously forecast estimates for Australia. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry and Australian Bureau of Statistics were used to calculate 'actual' THR and TKR utilisation rates for the years 2014-2019, by sex and age group. 'Forecast' utilisation rates for 2014-2019 were derived from an earlier study that modelled two alternate scenarios for THR and TKR in Australia: Scenario 1 assumed a constant rate of surgery; Scenario 2 assumed continued growth in surgery rates. Actual utilisation rates were compared descriptively to forecast rates for females and males (overall and by age group). Rate ratios were calculated to indicate the association between actual and forecast THR and TKR rates, with a rate ratio of 1.00 reflecting perfect alignment. Over the study period, 191,996 THRs (53% in females) and 312,203 TKRs (55% in females) were performed. For both sexes, actual rates lay clearly between the Scenario 1 and 2 forecast estimates. In 2019, actual THR utilisation rates were 179 per 100,000 females (Scenario 1: 156; Scenario 2: 200) and 158 per 100,000 males (Scenario 1: 139; Scenario 2: 191). Actual TKR utilisation rates in 2019 were 289 per 100,000 females (Scenario 1: 275; Scenario 2: 387) and 249 per 100,000 males (Scenario 1: 216; Scenario 2: 312). Age-specific rate ratios were close to 1.00 for all age groups, indicating good alignment between forecast and actual joint replacement rates. These validation analyses showed that linear plus exponential growth forecasting scenarios provided an efficient approximation of actual joint replacement utilisation. This indicates our modelling techniques can be used to judiciously predict future surgery demand, including for age groups with high surgery rates.

Project description:BackgroundPain persists in a moderate number of patients following hip or knee replacement surgery. Persistent pain may subsequently lead to the prolonged consumption of analgesics after surgery and expose patients to the adverse drug events of opioids and NSAIDs, especially in older patients and patients with comorbidities. This study aimed to identify risk factors for the increased use of opioids and other analgesics 1 year after surgery and focused on comorbidities and surgery-related factors.MethodsAll patients who underwent a primary hip or knee replacement for osteoarthritis from 2002 to 2013 were identified. Redeemed prescriptions for acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and opioids (mild and strong) were collected from a nationwide Drug Prescription Register. The user rates of analgesics and the adjusted risks ratios for analgesic use 1 year after joint replacement were calculated.ResultsOf the 6238 hip replacement and 7501 knee replacement recipients, 3591 (26.1%) were still using analgesics 1 year after surgery. Significant predictors of overall analgesic use (acetaminophen, NSAID, or opioid) were (risk ratio (95% CI)) age 65-74.9?years (reference <?65), 1.1 (1.03-1.2); age >?75?years, 1.2 (1.1-1.3); female gender, 1.2 (1.1-1.3); BMI 30-34.9?kg/m2 (reference <?25?kg/m2), 1.1 (1.04-1.2); BMI >?35?kg/m2, 1.4 (1.3-1.6); and a higher number of comorbidities (according to the modified Charlson Comorbidity Index score), 1.2 (1.1-1.4). Diabetes and other comorbidities were not significant independent predictors. Of the other clinical factors, the preoperative use of analgesics, 2.6 (2.5-2.8), and knee surgery, 1.2 (1.1-1.3), predicted the use of analgesics, whereas simultaneous bilateral knee replacement (compared to unilateral procedure) was a protective factor, 0.86 (0.77-0.96). Opioid use was associated with obesity, higher CCI score, epilepsy, knee vs hip surgery, unilateral vs bilateral knee operation, total vs unicompartmental knee replacement, and the preoperative use of analgesics/opioids.ConclusionsObesity (especially BMI >?35?kg/m2) and the preoperative use of analgesics were the strongest predictors of an increased postoperative use of analgesics. It is remarkable that also older age and higher number of comorbidities predicted analgesic use despite these patients being the most vulnerable to adverse drug events.