Background: Loosening is a major cause for failure of total hip and total knee arthroplasties (THAs/TKAs). Preemptive diagnostics of asymptomatic loosening could open strategies to prevent gross loosening. A multitude of biomarkers may discriminate between loosened and stable implants, but it is unknown which have the best performance. The present systematic review aimed to assess which biomarkers have shown the most promising results in discriminating between stable and aseptic loosened THAs and TKAs.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Academic Search Premier were systematically searched up to January 2020 for studies including THA/TKA and biomarkers to assess loosening. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the ICROMS tool to classify the quality of the studies.

Results: Twenty-eight (three high-quality) studies were included, reporting on a median of 48 patients (interquartile range 28–69). Serum and urine markers were evaluated in 22 and 10 studies, respectively. Tumor necrosis factor α and osteocalcin were significantly higher in loosened compared with stable implants. Urinary N-terminal telopeptide had significantly elevated levels in loosened prostheses.

Conclusion: Several serum and urine markers were promising in discriminating between loosened and stable implants. We recommend future studies to evaluate these biomarkers in a longitudinal fashion to assess whether progression of loosening is associated with a change in these biomarkers. In particular, high-quality studies assessing the usability of these biomarkers are needed.

@en

Background and purpose — In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), metal-backed (MBT) and all-polyethylene (APT) designs have shown comparable implant migration up to 2 years postoperatively using radiostereometric analysis (RSA). However, studies comparing mid-term migration of both designs are lacking. Furthermore, continuously migrating TKAs up to 2 years may continue to migrate or stabilize thereafter. Therefore, we compared 5-year migration of MBT and APT using either cruciate-stabilizing (CS) or posteriorstabilizing (PS) designs and specifically assessed migration profiles of continuously migrating TKAs beyond 2 years. Patients and methods — The present study includes results from 2 randomized trials comparing migration of cemented MBT with APT of either CS (CS study, n = 59) or PS (PS study, n = 56) design. 2 surgeons performed all surgeries. We used a linear mixed model for the analyses. Results — The overall migration between MBT and APT TKAs was similar for either the CS or PS design over a 5-year period. In both studies combined, 9 implants showed continuous migration in the second postoperative year, of which 1 (APT-CS) was revised for instability, 4 (2 MBT-CS, MBT-PS, APT-PS) stabilized, and 4 (2 MBT-CS, APT-CS, MBT-PS) lacked 5-year data. Interpretation — Overall migration was similar between MBT and APT TKAs up to 5 years, for both the CS and PS design. 4 initially migrating TKAs stabilized between 2-and 5-year follow-up, stressing the need for longer-term followup to determine whether second-year continuous migration correctly predicts loosening.@en

In order to improve care for total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), hospitals may want to compare their performance with hospitals in other countries. Pooling data across countries also enable early detection of infrequently occurring safety issues. We therefore aimed to assess the between-hospital variation and definitions used for revision, readmission, and complications across countries. • PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Emcare, and Academic Search Premier were searched from January 2009 to August 2020 for studies reporting on: (i) primary THA/ TKA; (ii) revision, readmission, or complications; and (iii) between-hospital variation. Most recent registry reports of Network of Orthopedic Registries of Europe members were also reviewed. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Integrated quality Criteria for the Review Of Multiple Study designs tool for studies and relevant domains for registries. We assessed agreement for the following domains: (i) outcome definition; (ii) follow-up and starting point; (iii) case-mix adjustment; and (iv) type of patients and hospitals included. • Between-hospital variation was reported in 33 (1 high-quality, 13 moderate-quality, and 19 low-quality) studies and 8 registry reports. The range of variation for revision was 0-33% for THA and 0-27% for TKA varying between assessment within hospital admission until 10 years of follow-up; for readmission, 0-40% and 0-32% for THA and TKA, respectively; and for complications, 0-75% and 0-50% for THA and TKA, respectively. Indicator definitions and methodological variables varied considerably across domains. • The large heterogeneity in definitions and methods used likely explains the considerable variation in between-hospital variation reported for revision, readmission, and complications, making it impossible to benchmark hospitals across countries or pool data for earlier detection of safety issues. It is necessary to collaborate internationally and strive for more uniformity in indicator definitions and methods in order to achieve reliable international benchmarking in the future.@en

BACKGROUND: Orthopaedic surgeons aim for mechanical alignment when performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) as malalignment is associated with loosening. Loosening may be predicted by migration as measured with radiostereometric analysis (RSA), but previous RSA studies on postoperative alignment have shown contradictory results and have been limited to cemented implants and small numbers of patients. Therefore, we performed a secondary analysis of 10 previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare migration between postoperative in-range and out-of-range cemented and uncemented TKA implants among patients with a preoperative varus or valgus knee. METHODS: All RCTs involving the use of RSA that had been conducted at 2 centers were included. Alignment was classified, with use of the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), as in-range (0° ± 3°) or out-of-range (<-3° or >3°). The fixation methods included cemented, uncemented-coated, and uncemented-uncoated. Migration was measured at 3, 12, and 24 months. A linear mixed model was used, with adjustment for fixation method and clustering of patients within centers. RESULTS: Of 476 TKA implants that had been out-of-range preoperatively, 290 were in-range postoperatively and 186 were out-of-range in either varus (n = 143) or valgus (n = 43) postoperatively. The mean migration at 3, 12, and 24 months was 0.73 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.79 mm), 0.92 mm (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.00 mm), and 0.97 mm (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.05 mm), respectively, for the in-range group and 0.80 mm (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.87 mm), 0.98 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.07 mm), and 1.04 mm (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.13 mm), respectively, for the out-of-range group (p = 0.07). The fixation method significantly influenced migration, with uncemented-uncoated implants migrating more than cemented and uncemented-coated implants (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative alignment did not influence migration of TKAs in the first 2 postoperative years in patients with preoperative varus or valgus alignment of the knee. However, the fixation method significantly influenced migration, with uncemented-uncoated implants showing the greatest migration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.@en

BackgroundThe number of revisions after TKA is expected to rise because of aging populations in many countries and because patients are undergoing TKA at younger ages. Aseptic loosening is a major reason for late revision, which can be predicted by radiostereometric analysis (RSA) of small groups of patients at 2 years of follow-up. RSA is therefore an ideal tool to assess new TKA designs before they are introduced to the market, although not every TKA design has been studied with RSA. If RSA-tested TKA designs have lower 10-year revision rates in national registries than non-RSA-tested TKA designs, RSA testing of all new designs could be advocated.Questions/purposesIn this study, we asked: Is there a difference in the all-cause revision rate between non-RSA-tested and RSA-tested TKA designs registered in national knee arthroplasty registries at 5 and 10 years of follow-up?MethodsKnee arthroplasty registries were identified through the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology webpage and through a manual internet search. Inclusion criteria were a minimum follow-up duration of 10 years and available revision or survival data per TKA design. Twenty-six registries were identified; seven were included comprising 339 TKA designs, of which 236 designs were classified as RSA-tested and 103 as non-RSA-tested. Six registries were excluded because no report was published. One registry was excluded because no fixation method was mentioned (79 TKA designs). Another registry was excluded because there was no 10-year data available (22 non-RSA-tested designs; 10 RSA-tested designs). Eleven registries were excluded because they did not provide revision rates per design and had not reached 10 years follow-up. The revision rates with their standard errors were extracted per design. We used the data from a recent meta-analysis to identify whether a TKA design was previously tested with RSA. This meta-analysis found 53 RSA studies comprising 70 different TKA designs. The prosthesis model, fixation method and insert type were extracted from these RSA-studies. The design characteristics of the TKA reported in the knee arthroplasty registries were also extracted, and if possible, matched to the TKA designs reported in the RSA-studies. At 5 years of follow-up, 191 TKA designs were identified as non-RSA-tested and 92 were identified as RSA-tested. At 10 years of follow-up, 154 TKA designs and 74 TKA designs were classified as non-RSA-tested and RSA-tested, respectively. A random-effects model using the Metafor Package in R statistics was used to estimate the pooled revision rate at 5 and 10 years of follow-up for both groups. The difference in revision rates between groups at 5 and 10 years of follow-up was estimated by including RSA as a factor in the random-effects model.ResultsMean all-cause revision rates at 5 years for non-RSA-tested and RSA-tested implants were 3.6% (95% CI 3.4 to 3.8) and 2.9% (95% CI 2.7 to 3.0), with a mean difference of 0.6% favoring RSA-tested implants (95% CI 0.4 to 0.8; p < 0.001). Mean all-cause revision rates at 10 years for non-RSA-tested and RSA-tested implants were 5.5% (95% CI 5.2 to 5.9) and 4.4% (95% CI 4.1 to 4.7), with a mean difference of 0.9% favoring RSA-tested implants (95% CI 0.4 to 1.3; p < 0.001).ConclusionsAlthough there are exceptions, across registries, TKA designs that have been tested in an RSA setting have a slightly lower (about 1%) mean all-cause revision rate at 5-year and 10-year follow-up than those tested in a non-RSA setting. Acknowledging the inherent limitations of this observational study, a risk difference of 1% could potentially translate into an approximate 20% decrease in revision burden up to 10 years, which may have a profound impact on patient morbidity and health-related costs.Level of EvidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.@en

Background and purpose — The all-polyethylene tibial (APT) component, introduced in the early 1970s, was surpassed by metal-backed tibial (MBT) trays as the first choice for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). With improved polyethylene, the modern APT components can reduce costs, and have shown equivalent results in survivorship and early migration of the cruciate-retaining and cruciate-stabilizing designs. This study compares the 2-year migration of a similarly designed APT-posterior stabilized (PS) and a MBT-PS TKA, using radiostereometric analysis (RSA). Patients and methods — 60 patients were randomized to receive either an APT Triathlon PS or an MBT Triathlon PS TKA (Stryker, NJ, USA). Migration measured by RSA and clinical scores were evaluated at baseline and at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Repeated measurements were analyzed with a linear mixed model and generalized estimating equations. Results — The mean maximum total point movement (MTPM) at 3, 12, and 24 months was 0.41 mm (95% CI 0.33–0.50), 0.57 mm (0.44–0.70), and 0.56 mm (0.42–0.69) respectively in the MBT group and 0.46 mm (0.36–0.57), 0.61 mm (0.49–0.73), and 0.64 mm (0.50–0.77) in the APT group. 2 MBT and 1 APT implant were considered unstable at the 2-year follow-up. The KSS Knee score and KSS Function across 3, 12, and 24 months were comparable in both groups. Interpretation — For an APT-PS designed component, MTPM measured with RSA is comparable to the MBT-PS component after 2 years of follow-up. No differences in complications or clinical outcomes were found.@en