| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Leta, Tesfaye H., et al.
(författare)
-
Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty With or Without Antibiotic Bone Cement
- 2024
-
Ingår i: JAMA Network Open. - 2574-3805. ; 7:5, s. 2412898-2412898
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: Despite increased use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in joint arthroplasty over recent decades, current evidence for prophylactic use of ALBC to reduce risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is insufficient. Objective: To compare the rate of revision attributed to PJI following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using ALBC vs plain bone cement. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international cohort study used data from 14 national or regional joint arthroplasty registries in Australia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the UK, and the US. The study included primary TKAs for osteoarthritis registered from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, and followed-up until December 31, 2021. Data analysis was performed from April to September 2023. Exposure: Primary TKA with ALBC vs plain bone cement. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was risk of 1-year revision for PJI. Using a distributed data network analysis method, data were harmonized, and a cumulative revision rate was calculated (1 - Kaplan-Meier), and Cox regression analyses were performed within the 10 registries using both cement types. A meta-analysis was then performed to combine all aggregated data and evaluate the risk of 1-year revision for PJI and all causes. Results: Among 2 168 924 TKAs included, 93% were performed with ALBC. Most TKAs were performed in female patients (59.5%) and patients aged 65 to 74 years (39.9%), fully cemented (92.2%), and in the 2015 to 2020 period (62.5%). All participating registries reported a cumulative 1-year revision rate for PJI of less than 1% following primary TKA with ALBC (range, 0.21%-0.80%) and with plain bone cement (range, 0.23%-0.70%). The meta-analyses based on adjusted Cox regression for 1 917 190 TKAs showed no statistically significant difference at 1 year in risk of revision for PJI (hazard rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.89-1.52) or for all causes (hazard rate ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.89-1.40) among TKAs performed with ALBC vs plain bone cement. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the risk of revision for PJI was similar between ALBC and plain bone cement following primary TKA. Any additional costs of ALBC and its relative value in reducing revision risk should be considered in the context of the overall health care delivery system.
|
|
| 3. |
- Leta, Tesfaye H., et al.
(författare)
-
The use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and systemic antibiotic prophylactic use in 2,971,357 primary total knee arthroplasties from 2010 to 2020: an international register-based observational study among countries in Africa, Europe, North America, and Oceania
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Acta Orthopaedica. - 1745-3674 .- 1745-3682. ; 94, s. 416-425
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose — Antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) and systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) have been used to reduce periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. We investigated the use of ALBC and SAP in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients and methods — This observational study is based on 2,971,357 primary TKAs reported in 2010–2020 to national/regional joint arthroplasty registries in Australia, Den-mark, Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. Aggregate-level data on trends and types of bone cement, antibiotic agents, and doses and duration of SAP used was extracted from participating registries. Results — ALBC was used in 77% of the TKAs with variation ranging from 100% in Norway to 31% in the USA. Palacos R+G was the most common (62%) ALBC type used. The primary antibiotic used in ALBC was gentamicin (94%). Use of ALBC in combination with SAP was common practice (77%). Cefazolin was the most common (32%) SAP agent. The doses and duration of SAP used varied from one single preoperative dosage as standard practice in Bolzano, Italy (98%) to 1-day 4 doses in Norway (83% of the 40,709 TKAs reported to the Norwegian arthroplasty register). Conclusion — The proportion of ALBC usage in primary TKA varies internationally, with gentamicin being the most common antibiotic. ALBC in combination with SAP was common practice, with cefazolin the most common SAP agent. The type of ALBC and type, dose, and duration of SAP varied among participating countries.
|
|
| 4. |
- Lewis, Peter L., et al.
(författare)
-
Increases in the rates of primary and revision knee replacement are reducing : a 15-year registry study across 3 continents
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Orthopaedica. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 1745-3674 .- 1745-3682. ; 91:4, s. 414-419
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose — Rates of knee replacement (KR) are increasing worldwide. Based on population and practice changes, there are forecasts of a further exponential increase in primary knee replacement through to 2030, and a corresponding increase in revision knee replacement. We used registry data to document changes in KR over the past 15 years, comparing practice changes across Sweden, Australia, and the United States. This may improve accuracy of future predictions. Patients and methods — Aggregated data from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (SKAR), the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), and the Kaiser Permanente Joint Replacement Registry (KPJRR) were used to compare surgical volume of primary and revision KR from 2003 to 2017. Incidence was calculated using population census statistics from Statistics Sweden and the Australian Bureau of Statistics, as well as the yearly active membership numbers from Kaiser Permanente. Further analysis of KR by age < 65 and ≥ 65 years was carried out. Results — All registries recorded an increase in primary and revision KR, with a greater increase seen in the KPJRR. The rate of increase slowed during the study period. In Sweden and Australia, there was a smaller increase in revision surgery compared with primary procedures. There was consistency in the mean age at surgery, with a steady small decrease in the proportion of women having primary KR. The incidence of KR in the younger age group remained low in all 3 registries, but the proportional increases were greater than those seen in the ≥ 65 years of age group. Interpretation — There has been a generalized deceleration in the rate of increase of primary and revision KR. While there are regional differences in KR incidence, and rates of change, the rate of increase does not seem to be as great as previously predicted.
|
|
| 5. |
- Lewis, Peter L., et al.
(författare)
-
The effect of patient and prosthesis factors on revision rates after total knee replacement using a multi-registry meta-analytic approach
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Acta Orthopaedica. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 1745-3682 .- 1745-3674. ; 93, s. 284-293
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Characteristics of patients receiving total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and prostheses used vary between regions and change with time. How these practice variations influence revision remains unclear. We combined registry data for better understanding of the impact of variation, which could potentially improve revision rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data from 2003 to 2019 for primary TKA from arthroplasty registries of Sweden (SKAR), Australia (AOANJRR), and Kaiser Permanente (KPJRR). We included 1,072,924 TKA procedures for osteoarthritis. Factors studied included age, sex, ASA class, BMI category, prosthesis constraint, fixation, bearing mobility, patellar resurfacing, and polyethylene type. Cumulative percentage revision (CPR) was calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates, and unadjusted Cox hazard ratios were used for comparisons. Random-effects generic inverse-variance meta-analytic methods were used to determine summary effects. RESULTS: We found similarities in age and sex, but between-registry differences occurred in the other 7 factors studied. Patients from Sweden had lower BMI and ASA scores compared with other registries. Use of cement fixation was similar in the SKAR and KPJRR, but there were marked differences in patellar resurfacing and posterior stabilized component use. Meta-analysis results regarding survivorship favored patients aged ≥ 65 years and minimally stabilized components. There were inconsistent results with time for sex, fixation, and bearing mobility, and no differences for the patellar resurfacing or polyethylene type comparisons. INTERPRETATION: Marked practice variation was found. Use of minimally stabilized and possibly also cemented and fixed bearing prostheses is supported.
|
|
| 6. |
- Lewis, Peter L., et al.
(författare)
-
Variation and trends in reasons for knee replacement revision : a multi-registry study of revision burden
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Acta Orthopaedica. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 1745-3674 .- 1745-3682. ; 92:2, s. 182-188
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose — Studies describing time-related change in reasons for knee replacement revision have been limited to single regions or institutions, commonly analyze only 1st revisions, and may not reflect true caseloads or findings from other areas. We used revision procedure data from 3 arthroplasty registries to determine trends and differences in knee replacement revision diagnoses. Patients and methods — We obtained aggregated data for 78,151 revision knee replacement procedures recorded by the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (SKAR), the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), and the Kaiser Permanente Joint Replacement Registry (KPJRR) for the period 2003–2017. Equivalent diagnosis groups were created. We calculated the annual proportions of the most common reasons for revision. Results — Infection, loosening, and instability were among the 5 most common reasons for revision but magnitude and ranking varied between registries. Over time there were increases in proportions of revisions for infection and decreases in revisions for wear. There were inconsistent proportions and trends for the other reasons for revision. The incidence of revision for infection showed a uniform increase. Interpretation — Despite some differences in terminology, comparison of registry-recorded revision diagnoses is possible, but defining a single reason for revision is not always clear-cut. There were common increases in revision for infection and decreases in revision for wear, but variable changes in other categories. This may reflect regional practice differences and therefore generalizability of studies regarding reasons for revision is unwise.
|
|
| 7. |
- Badawy, Mona, et al.
(författare)
-
Hospital volume and the risk of revision in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the Nordic countries -an observational study of 14,496 cases
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2474. ; 18:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: High procedure volume and dedication to unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been suggested to improve revision rates. This study aimed to quantify the annual hospital volume effect on revision risk in Oxfordu? nicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the Nordic countries. Methods: 14,496 cases of cemented medial Oxford III UKA were identified in 126 hospitals in the four countries included in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database from 2000 to 2012. Hospitals were divided by quartiles into 4 annual procedure volume groups (≤11, 12-23, 24-43 and ≥44). The outcome was revision risk after 2 and 10 years calculated using Kaplan Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to assess the Hazard Ratio (HR) of any revision due to specific reasons with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: The implant survival was 80% at 10 years in the volume group ≤11 procedures per year compared to 83% in other volume groups. The HR adjusted for age category, sex, year of surgery and nation was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.76-0.99, p = 0.036) for the group 12-23 procedures per year, 0.78 (95% CI: 0.68-0.91, p = 0.002) for the group 24-43 procedures per year and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70-0.94, p = 0.006) for the group ≥44 procedures per year compared to the low volume group. Log-rank test was p = 0.003. The risk of revision for unexplained pain was 40-50% higher in the low compared with other volume groups. Conclusion: Low volume hospitals performing ≤11 Oxford III UKAs per year were associated with an increased risk of revision compared to higher volume hospitals, and unexplained pain as revision cause was more common in low volume hospitals.
|
|
| 8. |
- Berg, Urban, et al.
(författare)
-
Fast-Track Programs in Total Hip and Knee Replacement at Swedish Hospitals-Influence on 2-Year Risk of Revision and Mortality
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Medicine. - : MDPI AG. - 2077-0383. ; 10:8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: We aimed to study the influence of fast-track care programs in total hip and total knee replacements (THR and TKR) at Swedish hospitals on the risk of revision and mortality within 2 years after the operation. Methods: Data were collected from the Swedish Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Registers (SHAR and SKAR), including 67,913 THR and 59,268 TKR operations from 2011 to 2015 on patients with osteoarthritis. Operations from 2011 to 2015 Revision and mortality in the fast-track group were compared with non-fast-track using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression analysis with adjustments. Results: The hazard ratio (HR) for revision within 2 years after THR with fast-track was 1.19 (CI: 1.03-1.39), indicating increased risk, whereas no increased risk was found in TKR (HR 0.91; CI: 0.79-1.06). The risk of death within 2 years was estimated with a HR of 0.85 (CI: 0.74-0.97) for TKR and 0.96 (CI: 0.85-1.09) for THR in fast-track hospitals compared to non-fast-track. Conclusions: Fast-track programs at Swedish hospitals were associated with an increased risk of revision in THR but not in TKR, while we found the mortality to be lower (TKR) or similar (THR) as compared to non-fast track.
|
|
| 9. |
- Berg, Urban, et al.
(författare)
-
Influence of fast-track programs on patient-reported outcomes in total hip and knee replacement (THR/TKR) at Swedish hospitals 2011-2015: an observational study including 51,169 THR and 8,393 TKR operations
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Orthopaedica. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 1745-3674 .- 1745-3682. ; 91:3, s. 306-312
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose - Fast-track care programs have been broadly introduced at Swedish hospitals in elective total hip and knee replacement (THR/TKR). We studied the influence of fast-track programs on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 1 year after surgery, by exploring outcome measures registered in the Swedish arthroplasty registers. Patients and methods - Data were obtained from the Swedish Knee and Hip Arthroplasty Registers and included TKR and THR operations 2011-2015 on patients with osteoarthritis. Based on questionnaires concerning the clinical pathway and care programs at Swedish hospitals, the patients were divided in 2 groups depending on whether they had been operated in a fast-track program or not. PROs of the fast-track group were compared with not fast-track using regression analysis. EQ-5D, EQ VAS, Pain VAS, and Satisfaction VAS were analyzed for both THR and TKR operations. The PROMs for TKR also included KOOS. Results - The differences of EQ-5D, EQ VAS, Pain VAS, and Satisfaction VAS 1 year after surgery were small but all in favor of fast-track for both THR and TKR, also in subscales of KOOS for TKR except KOOS QoL. However, the effect sizes as measured by Cohens' d formula were < 0.2 for all PROs, in both THR and TKR. Interpretation - Our results indicate that the fast-track programs may be at least as good as conventional care from the perspective of PROs 1-year postoperatively.
|
|
| 10. |
- Bohm, Eric R., et al.
(författare)
-
Collection and Reporting of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Arthroplasty Registries: Multinational Survey and Recommendations
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. - 0009-921X. ; 479:10, s. 2151-2166
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated questionnaires that are completed by patients. Arthroplasty registries vary in PROM collection and use. Current information about registry collection and use of PROMs is important to help improve methods of PROM data analysis, reporting, comparison, and use toward improving clinical practice. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: To characterize PROM collection and use by registries, we asked: (1) What is the current practice of PROM collection by arthroplasty registries that are current or former members of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries, and are there sufficient similarities in PROM collection between registries to enable useful international comparisons that could inform the improvement of arthroplasty care? (2) How do registries differ in PROM administration and demographic, clinical, and comorbidity index variables collected for case-mix adjustment in data analysis and reporting? (3) What quality assurance methods are used for PROMs, and how are PROM results reported and used by registries? (4) What recommendations to arthroplasty registries may improve PROM reporting and facilitate international comparisons? METHODS: An electronic survey was developed with questions about registry structure and collection, analysis, reporting, and use of PROM data and distributed to directors or senior administrators of 39 arthroplasty registries that were current or former members of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries. In all, 64% (25 of 39) of registries responded and completed the survey. Missing responses from incomplete surveys were captured by contacting the registries, and up to three reminder emails were sent to nonresponding registries. Recommendations about PROM collection were drafted, revised, and approved by the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries PROMs Working Group members. RESULTS: Of the 25 registries that completed the survey, 15 collected generic PROMs, most frequently the EuroQol-5 Dimension survey; 16 collected joint-specific PROMs, most frequently the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; and 11 registries collected a satisfaction item. Most registries administered PROM questionnaires within 3 months before and 1 year after surgery. All 16 registries that collected PROM data collected patient age, sex or gender, BMI, indication for the primary arthroplasty, reason for revision arthroplasty, and a comorbidity index, most often the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. All 16 registries performed regular auditing and reporting of data quality, and most registries reported PROM results to hospitals and linked PROM data to other data sets such as hospital, medication, billing, and emergency care databases. Recommendations for transparent reporting of PROMs were grouped into four categories: demographic and clinical, survey administration, data analysis, and results. CONCLUSION: Although registries differed in PROM collection and use, there were sufficient similarities that may enable useful data comparisons. The International Society of Arthroplasty Registries PROMs Working Group recommendations identify issues that may be important to most registries such as the need to make decisions about survey times and collection methods, as well as how to select generic and joint-specific surveys, handle missing data and attrition, report data, and ensure representativeness of the sample. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: By collecting PROMs, registries can provide patient-centered data to surgeons, hospitals, and national entities to improve arthroplasty care.
|
|
