Search

Background and purpose: The amount of information publicly available from arthroplasty registries is large but could be used more effectively. This project aims to improve the knowledge concerning existing registries to facilitate access, transparency, harmonization, and reporting. Methods: Within the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) we aimed at developing, testing, adopting, and making publicly available a short, standardized registry description with items considered relevant for stakeholders using a cross-sectional study survey. Items were chosen based on a literature review and expert advice, selected by 9 ISAR working group members, tested iteratively in 3 registries, and commented upon by 4 external experts. All 29 ISAR member registries as of July 2023 were invited to participate in the project. Results: Included items covered general descriptive information regarding registries, information related to governance, outcomes, data quality, data access, and registry production. The template was adopted, completed, and made publicly available by 25 of the 29 registries. Of those, 2/3 were national registries. 23 captured both hip and knee arthroplasties and 10 captured shoulder arthroplasties. Most registries had public reporting of data quality, methods, and results. Data was accessible in all but 2 registries, mainly as aggregated data. Important items relevant to registry quality for researchers to consistently indicate in scientific papers include scope, inclusion criteria, outcomes definitions, coverage/completeness, and validation processes. Conclusion: This ISAR initiative implemented a short, standardized description to facilitate appropriate use of orthopedic registry data worldwide relevant for a diverse group of stakeholders including researchers, industry, public health and regulatory agencies.

Background and purpose: Younger recipients of total hip arthroplasty (THA) highly prioritize returning to preoperative levels of physical activity (PA). Surgeons have tended to give cautious advice concerning high-impact sports participation, but there have been few long-term studies. The purpose of our study was to investigate the risk of revision arthroplasty in relation to postoperative PA levels. Methods: Patients registered in the Geneva Arthroplasty Register (GAR) who had elective THA when they were aged < 65 years were studied. Postoperative PA was collected prospectively 5-yearly using the UCLA activity scale. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate associations between PA and risk of revision THA. Results: Amongst 1,370 eligible subjects, median age at THA 58 years (interquartile range 51–61), UCLA scores were available for 973 (71%). During follow-up over 15 years, there were 79 revisions, giving a cumulative risk of 7.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.8–9.4). After adjusting for covariates, we found an increased risk of revision for each unit increase in postoperative PA (HR 1.2, CI 1.1–1.4), and among people performing the most intensive PA (HR 2.7, CI 1.3–5.6) compared with those who were inactive. Conclusion: The overall risk of revision was small but intensive and moderate PA may be associated with an increased risk of revision.

Background and purpose: We aimed to evaluate the long-term predictive value of radiographic abnormality and/or hip pain assessed 5 years following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the occurrence of revision for aseptic loosening between 5 and 25 years postoperatively. Patients and methods: We included all primary THAs performed between 1996 and 2011 (same uncemented cup, polyethylene-ceramic bearing, 28 mm head, cemented stem) and prospectively enrolled in the institutional registry, for whom baseline and follow-up radiographs were available. At 5 years radiographically we assessed femoral osteolysis and/or stem migration. Pain was evaluated with the Harris Hip pain subscore. Kaplan–Meier survival and Cox regression analyses were performed. Results: 1,317 primary THAs were included. 25 THAs (2%) were revised for aseptic stem loosening. Any abnormal radiographic sign at 5 years was present in 191 THAs (14%). Occasional hip pain was reported by 20% and slight to severe pain by 12% of patients at 5 years. In patients < 60 years, 10 of the 12 later revised for aseptic stem loosening had abnormal radiographs at 5 years vs. 5 of the 13 later revised in those ≥ 60 years. Hazard ratios (HR) were 34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 7–155) in younger vs. 4 (CI 1–11) in the older group. HR for association of hip pain at 5 years with future revision was 3 (CI 1–5). Conclusion: The presence of abnormal radiographic signs 5 years after THA was strongly associated with later revision for aseptic stem loosening, especially in patients < 60 years. The association between pain at 5 years and future revision was much weaker.

Background and purpose — Prior to primary total knee arthroplasty (pTKA), 6–34% of patients have undergone surgical procedure(s) of their knee. We investigated whether history of previous surgeries influences the risk of revision of pTKA, the risk according to the type of previous surgery, and how previous surgery influences specific causes of revision and the time of revision. Patients and methods — This is a prospective cohort study from the Geneva Arthroplasty Registry. All pTKA between 2000 and 2016 were included and followed until December 31, 2019. Outcomes were risk of revision, evaluated using Kaplan–Meier survival and Cox and competing risks regression, the specific causes, and time of revision. Results — Of 3,945 pTKA included (mean age 71 years, 68% women), 21% had a history of previous surgery, with 8.3% revisions vs. 4.3%, at 3–20 years’ follow-up (mean 8.6). 5- and 10-year cumulative failure by previous surgery (yes vs. no) were 6.6% (95% CI 5.1–8.5) vs. 3.3% (CI 2.7–4.0), and 8.4% (CI 6.6–10.6) vs. 4.5% (CI 3.8–5.4). Baseline differences explained only part of the higher risk (adjusted HR 1.5, CI 1.1–2.1). The risk of failure was higher for all causes of revision considered. Patients in the previous surgery group had a higher risk of an early revision. Interpretation — A history of previous surgery adversely affected the outcome with a 1.5 times higher cumulative risk of all-cause revision over the course of up to 20 years after index surgery. The increased risk was seen for all causes of revision and was highest in the first years.

Background and purpose: The influence of postoperative limping on patient satisfaction and amount of limping reduction following THA are not well documented. We (1) assessed if postoperative limping is associated with satisfaction 5 years after THA performed via the lateral or anterior approach; (2) evaluated the influence of surgical approach on amount of limping reduction following THA. Patients and methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study of primary elective THAs performed in 2002–2013. Limping was assessed before and 5 years after surgery using the Harris Hip limping sub-score. Satisfaction was assessed at 5 years on a 5-point Likert scale. We compared proportions of satisfied patients among groups of limping. Evolution of limping before and after surgery was noted. Analyses were performed overall and stratified by pain and surgical approach. We used univariate and multivariate logbinomial regression models. Results: 1,257 patients were included (mean age 70 years). 81% had surgery via a lateral and 19% via an anterior approach. Before THA, 60% had moderate to severe limping and all reported pain. After THA, limping and pain improved; 9% of patients were dissatisfied. In multivariate analysis stratified on pain level, limping was associated with higher dissatisfaction. Similar results were obtained after lateral vs. anterior approach. Interpretation: Postoperative limping impacts patient satisfaction after THA. The association varied by degree of limping and absence or presence of pain. It was independent of surgical approach. 5 years after THA occurrence of limping was largely reduced after both a lateral and an anterior approach, with low evidence of a greater reduction under an anterior approach.

Background and purpose — The number of shoulder registries increases. We assessed international trends in use of shoulder arthroplasty, and described the current state of procedure selection and outcome presentation as documented in national and regional joint registries. Methods — Published reports from 9 population-based shoulder arthroplasty registries (country/region: Norway, Sweden, New Zealand, Denmark, California, Australia, Emilia-Romagna, Germany, and United Kingdom) were analyzed. Data were extracted on age, sex, disease indication, type of surgical procedure, surgical volume, and outcomes. Results — Shoulder arthroplasty incidence rate in 2012 was 20 procedures/105 population with a 6-fold variation between the highest (Germany) and lowest (United Kingdom) country. The annual incidence rate increased 2.8-fold in the past decade. Within the indications osteoarthritis, fracture, and cuff-tear arthropathy variations in procedure choice between registries were large. Outcomes evaluation focused on revision in all registries, but different measures and strata were used. Only Australia provided revision rates for prosthesis brands stratified by both indication and procedure. Finally, in 2 registries with available data surgeons performed on average 10–11 procedures yearly. Interpretation — Annual incidence rates of shoulder arthroplasty have almost tripled over the past decade. There is wide variation in procedure selection for the major indications, a low average surgeon volume, a substantial number of brands with small annual volume, and large variation in outcome presentation. The internationally increasing registry activity is an excellent basis for improving the so far weak evidence in shoulder arthroplasty.