Does the use of patient-specific instrumentation improve resource use in the operating room and outcome after total knee arthroplasty?: A multicenter study

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been introduced to reduce instruments and surgical time and to improve implant alignment. The aim of this study was to compare TKA with patient-specific and conventional instrumentation with regard to the use of resources in the operating room (OR), alignment and patient-reported outcome. A total of 139 TKA with PSI or conventional instrumentation were included in three centers. Economic variables of the surgery (number of instrument trays, setup and cut-sewtime), radiological alignment and patient reported outcomes (VAS Pain Scale, Oxford Knee Score, EQ-5D) were assessed after 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months. There was a significant reduction of instrument trays and of time in the OR in the PSI group. The reduction varied between the centers. With strict reorganization, more than 50% of the instrument trays could be reduced while using PSI. There were no significant differences in cut-sew-time, implant position, leg axis, pain and function. The use of PSI was associated with significantly less OR resources. However, the savings did not compensate the costs for this technology

Analysis of Total Knee Arthroplasty revision causes

Abstract Background The number of revision Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) is rising in many countries. The aim of this study was the prospective assessment of the underlying causes leading to revision TKA in a tertiary care hospital and the comparison of those reasons with previously published data. Methods In this study patients who had revision TKA between 2010 and 2015 were prospectively included. Revision causes were categorized using all available information from patients’ records including preoperative diagnostics, intraoperative findings as well as the results of the periprosthetic tissue analysis. According to previous studies patients were divided into early (up to 2 years) and late revision (more than 2 years). Additional also re-revisions after already performed revision TKA were included. Results We assessed 312 patients who underwent 402 revision TKA, 89.6% of them were referred to our center for revision surgery. In 289 patients (71.9%) this was the first revision surgery after primary TKA. Among the first revisions the majority was late revisions (73.7%). One hundred thirteen patients (28.1%) had already had one or more revision surgeries before. Overall, the most frequent reason for revision was infection (36.1%) followed by aseptic loosening (21.9%) and periprosthetic fracture (13.7%). Conclusions In a specialized arthroplasty center periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) was the most common reason for revision and re-revision TKA. This is in contrast to population-based registry data and has consequences on costs as well as on success rates in such centers

Similar outcomes in computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty: ten-year results of a prospective randomized study

Background!#!Computer-assisted navigation (CAS) was developed to improve the surgical accuracy and precision. Many studies demonstrated better alignment in the coronal plane in CAS TKA compared to conventional technique. The influence on the functional outcome is still unclear. Only few studies report long-term results of CAS TKA. This study was initiated to investigate 10-year patient-reported outcome of CAS and conventional TKA.!##!Methods!#!From initially 80 patients of a randomized study of CAS and conventional TKA a total of 50 patients could be evaluated at the 10-year follow-up. The Knee Society Score and EuroQuol Questionnaire were assessed. For all patients a competing risk analysis for revision was performed.!##!Results!#!The patient-reported outcome measures demonstrated similar values for both groups. The 10-year risk for revision was 2.5% for conventional TKA and 7.5% for CAS TKA (p=0.237).!##!Conclusions!#!There was no difference between CAS and conventional TKA with regard to patient-reported outcome and revision risk ten years after surgery.!##!Trial registration!#!This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov on 11/30/2009, ID: NCT01022099

Ultracongruent insert design is a safe alternative to posterior cruciate-substituting total knee arthroplasty: 5-year results of a randomized controlled trial

As part of the national influenza pandemic preparedness, surveillance systems have been established in Germany in addition to the mandatory notifications according to the Protection Against Infection Act. The aim of these systems is the description, analysis, and evaluation of the epidemiology of acute respiratory infections (ARIs), the identification of the circulating viruses, and the trend. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the systems have been expanded to enable monitoring of infections with SARS-CoV‑2.Three systems are presented: GrippeWeb, the primary care sentinel Arbeitsgemeinschaft Influenza with its electronic reporting module SEE

Increased inflammatory response is associated with less favorable functional results 5 years after total knee arthroplasty

Purpose Allergy against implant materials is discussed controversially and still not fully understood. Despite these controversies, a relevant number of patients receive hypoallergenic knee implants. The aim of this study was to compare a new coating system with the standard implant in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Additionally, the influence of proinflammatory cytokines on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was investigated. Methods 120 patients without known metal allergy and without previous metal implants were included. The patients were randomized to receive a coated or standard TKA of the same knee system. 105 patients completed the 5 year follow-up. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including knee function (Oxford Knee Score, OKS), quality of life (SF36) and UCLA activity scale were assessed. Additionally, several cytokines with a possible role in implant allergy were measured in patient`s serum (IL-1beta, IL-5, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IP-10, IFN γ, TNF α). Group comparison was performed using Mann–Whitney U test for continuous values and chi-square test for categorical values. Results There were no differences in PROMs between both groups at any follow-up. The majority of patients demonstrated no elevation of the measured blood cytokines. The blood cytokine pattern after 5 years demonstrated no differences between study groups. There was a significant association between elevated IL-8 values and worse results in the overall OKS (p = 0.041), the OKS function component (p = 0.004), the UCLA activity scale (p = 0.007) and the physical component of SF36 (p = 0.001). Conclusion There were no problems with the new coating during mid-term follow-up and no differences in PROMs between coated and standard TKA. Patients with an increased inflammatory response demonstrated worse functional results, regardless of the implant. Level of evidence I. Clinical trial registration The study protocol was registered in the US National Institutes of Health’s database (http:// www.clini caltr ials. gov) registry under NCT00862511

Indication Criteria for Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with Hip Osteoarthritis—Recommendations from a German Consensus Initiative

Background: Osteoarthritis of the hip (hip OA) is a leading cause of pain and disability in elderly people. If non-surgical therapies become ineffective, patients may consider total hip arthroplasty (THA). The biggest challenge in recommending a THA is identifying patients for whom the benefits of this procedure outweigh the potential risks. The aim of this initiative was to develop a clinical practice guideline with accompanying algorithm to guide consultations on THA, supported by a pocket-sized checklist. Methods: The initiative “Evidence- and consensus-based indication criteria for total hip replacement (EKIT-Hip)” used a stepwise approach, starting with an inauguration workshop, where a multidisciplinary German stakeholder panel from various scientific societies agreed on the working process. A Project Coordinating Group (PCG) was formed, and it performed a comprehensive systematic literature search of guidelines and systematic reviews related to the indication criteria for THA, as well as factors influencing outcomes. Based on best-available evidence, preliminary recommendations were formulated by the PCG and discussed with the stakeholder panel during a consensus meeting. In addition, the panel was asked to assess the feasibility of an extracted algorithm and to approve a final checklist. Results: In total, 31 recommendations were approved by 29 representatives of 23 societies. These were used to underpin an algorithm (EKIT-Algorithm), which indicates the minimum requirements for a THA (confirmed diagnosis of hip OA, present and documented individual burden of illness, ineffectiveness of non-surgical therapies, and absence of any contraindications). Once these criteria are fulfilled, further considerations should encompass the medical implications of modifiable risk factors and patients’ individual treatment goals, as discussed during shared decision making. The subsequently developed checklist (EKIT-Checklist) lists relevant criteria for decision making. Conclusions: Adherence to the EKIT-Algorithm, conveniently accessed via the EKIT-Checklist, should improve the standardization of decision making leading to a recommendation for THA. By applying minimum requirements and patient-related risk factors, as well as considering patients’ individual goals, it is possible to identify patients for whom the benefits of THA may exceed the potential risks