Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with severe knee osteoarthritis (OA), who had their knee surgery postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods PubMed/Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central databases were systematically reviewed for studies reporting outcomes of home-based treatments for knee OA. Due to between-study differences in treatment strategy and reporting methods the results were not pooled and findings of the current review were presented in a narrative manner. Results The comprehensive literature search yielded 33 eligible studies that were included in this review. Management is performed at home and consists of exercise, proper nutrition, physical therapy and use of corrective and assistive orthotics. Virtual education on self-management strategies should be part of coping with knee OA. Initiating an exercise programme involving gymnastics, stretching, home cycling and muscle strengthening is highly recommended. Obese patients are encouraged to set weight loss goals and adopt a healthy diet. Potential benefits but weak evidence has been shown for the use of knee braces, sleeves, foot orthotics or cushioned footwear. Walking aids may be prescribed, when considered necessary, along with the provision of instructions for their use. Conclusion When bridging the time to rescheduled surgery, it is essential to use appropriate home-based tools for the management of knee OA if pain is to be reduced and need for analgesics or opioid use is to be diminished while maintaining or even improving the functioning and avoiding further limitation of range of motion and subsequent muscular atrophies. Finally, none of these treatments may completely substitute for the life-changing effect of a total knee arthroplasty in patients with severe knee OA. Hence, the subsequent goal is to gradually and safely reinstate elective surgery.

Purpose There has been increasing interest in accelerated programs for knee arthroplasty. We examined the efficacy and safety of an outpatient surgery (OS) pathway in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Methods This case–controlled study evaluates patients operated for UKA in an OS pathway ( n  = 20) compared to rapid recovery (RR), the current standard ( n  = 20). We investigated whether patients could be discharged on the day of surgery, resulting in comparable or better outcome by means of adverse events (AEs) in terms of pain (numerical rating scale, NRS), incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and opiate use (<48 h postoperatively), complication and readmission rates (<3 months postoperatively). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) were obtained preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Results Postoperative pain (NRS > 5) was the most common reason for prolonged hospital stay in the OS pathway. Eighty-five per cent of the patients were discharged on the day of surgery, whereas 95 % of the patients were discharged on postoperative day 3 in the RR pathway. Overall, median pain scores in both pathways did not exceed a NRS score of 5, without significant differences (RR vs. OS) in the number of patients with PONV (4 vs. 2) and opiate use (11 vs. 9) <48 h postoperatively. At 3 months postoperatively, no significant differences were found for AEs and PROMS between both pathways. Conclusion The results of this study illustrates that an OS pathway for UKA is effective and safe with acceptable clinical outcome. Well-established and adequate standardized protocols, inclusion and exclusion criteria and a change in mindset for both the patient and the multidisciplinary team are the key factors for the implementation of an OS pathway. Level of evidence Case–control study, Level III.

Purpose Patient-specific instruments (PSIs) are already in relatively common use, and their post-operative radiographic results are equal to those for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with conventional instrumentation. PSI use requires a preoperative MRI scan, CT scan, or a combination of MRI and a long-leg standing radiograph. However, there is no consensus as to which of these modalities, MRI or CT, is the preferred imaging modality when performing TKA with PSIs. Methods This systematic literature review and meta-analysis studied the differences in alignment outliers between CT- and MRI-based PSI for TKA. A search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase was conducted, without restriction on date of publication. Only level I evidence studies written in English that included TKA with the use of MRI- and CT-based PSI were selected. A meta-analysis was then performed of the rate of outliers in the biomechanical axis and individual femoral and tibial component alignment. Where considerable heterogeneity among studies was present or the data did not provide sufficient information for performing the meta-analysis, a qualitative synthesis was undertaken. Results Twelve randomized controlled trials, studying 841 knees, were eligible for data extraction and meta-analysis. MRI-based PSI resulted in a significantly lower proportion of coronal plane outliers with regard to the lateral femoral component (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30–0.89, P  = 0.02), without significant heterogeneity (n.s.). There were no significant differences regarding the biomechanical axis or frontal femoral and individual tibial component alignment. Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that alignment with MRI-based PSI is at least as good as, if not better than, that with CT-based PSI. To prevent for malalignment, MRI should be the imaging modality of choice when performing TKA surgery with PSI. Level of evidence I.

Purpose General consensus of patient selection criteria for outpatient joint arthroplasty is lacking, which is paramount to prevent prolonged hospital stay, adverse events and/or readmissions. This review highlights patient selection criteria for OJA based on the current literature and expert opinion. Methods A search of the English and International electronic healthcare databases including MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, AMED and the Cochrane library was performed in November 2015 to include studies published during the last 10 years. Furthermore, a survey of physicians from different specialties was performed. Results Fourteen studies described results regarding outpatient joint arthroplasty. Studies on outpatient hip and/or knee arthroplasty resulted in similar outcome in preselected patients. Patients who are able and willing to participate, with a low ASA classification (II), bleeding disorders, poorly controlled and/or severe cardiac (e.g. heart failure, arrhythmia) or pulmonary (e.g. embolism, respiratory failure) comorbidities, uncontrolled DM (type I or II), a high BMI (>30 m 2 /kg), chronic opioid consumption, functional neurological impairments, dependent functional status, chronic/end-stage renal disease and/or reduced preoperative cognitive capacity should be excluded from outpatient joint arthroplasty. The expert opinion-based selection criteria were comparable to literature with a further extension of exclusion for patients with practical issue’s, urologic medical history and/or severe mobility disorders. Conclusion Based on the current literature, the presented patient selection criteria provide a basis for outpatient joint arthroplasty and can be useful when selecting patients. Together with a change in mindset, a multidisciplinary approach and literature-based protocols, outpatient joint arthroplasty can be applied in daily orthopaedic practice while ensuring patients’ safety. Level of evidence Clinical review, Level III.

Purpose To determine whether patient-specific instrumentation (PSI), computer-assisted surgery (CAS) or robot-assisted surgery (RAS) enable more accurate rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compared to conventional instrumentation, in terms of deviation from the planned target and the proportion of outliers from the target zone. Methods The authors independently conducted three structured electronic literature searches using the PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 2007 to 2020. Studies were included if they compared rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate during TKA using conventional instrumentation versus PSI, CAS, and/or RAS, and reported deviation from preoperatively planned rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate in terms of absolute angles and/or number of outliers. Methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed by two researchers according to the Downs and Black Quality Checklist for Health Care Intervention Studies. Results Fifteen studies, that reported on 2925 knees, were eligible for this systematic review, of which 6 studies used PSI, and 9 used CAS. No studies were found for RAS. Of the studies that reported on angular deviation from preoperatively planned rotational alignment, most found smaller deviations using PSI (0.5° to 1.4°) compared to conventional instrumentation (1.0° to 1.6°). All studies that reported on proportions of outliers from a target zone (± 3°), found lower rates of outliers using PSI (0 to 22%) compared to conventional instrumentation (5 to 96%). Most studies reported smaller angular deviation from preoperatively planned rotational alignment using CAS (0.1° to 6.9°) compared to conventional instrumentation (1.1° to 7.8°). Of the studies that reported on proportions of outliers from a target zone (± 3°), most found fewer outliers using CAS (10 to 61%) compared to conventional instrumentation (17 to 78%). Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that both CAS and PSI can improve the accuracy of rotational alignment of the tibial baseplate by decreasing angular deviation from the preoperatively planned target and reducing the proportion of outliers from the target zone. The clinical relevance is that PSI and CAS can improve alignment, though the thresholds necessary to grant better outcomes and survival remain unclear. Level of evidence IV.

We present the outcome of an independent prospective series of phase‐3 Oxford medial mobile‐bearing unicompartmental knee replacement surgery. Eight surgeons performed the 154 procedures in a community‐based hospital between 1998 and 2003 for patients aged 60 and above. Seventeen knees were revised; in 14 cases a total knee replacement was performed, in 3 cases a component of the unicompartmental knee prosthesis was revised, resulting in a survival rate of 89% during these 2–7 years follow‐up interval. This study shows that mobile‐bearing unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally invasive technique is a demanding procedure. The study emphasises the importance of routine in surgical management and strict adherence to indications and operation technique used to reduce outcome failure.

Purpose Despite multimodal pain management and advances in anesthetic techniques, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains painful during the early postoperative phase. This trial investigated whether computer-assisted cryotherapy (CAC) is effective in reduction of pain and consumption of opioids in patients operated for TKA following an outpatient surgery pathway. Methods Sixty patients scheduled for primary TKA were included in this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial receiving CAC at 10–12 °C (Cold-group, n  = 30) or at 21 °C (Warm-group, n  = 30) during the first 7 days after TKA according to a fixed schedule. All patients received the same pre-, peri- and postoperative care with a multimodal pain protocol. Pain was assessed before and after every session of cryotherapy using the numerical rating scale for pain (NRS-pain). The consumption of opioids was strictly noted during the first 4 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were knee swelling, visual hematoma and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). These parameters were measured pre-, 1, 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Results In both study groups, a reduction in NRS-pain after every CAC session were seen during the postoperative period of 7 days. A mean reduction of 0.9 and 0.7 on the NRS-pain was seen for respectively the Cold- ( P  = 0.008) and Warm-group (n.s.). A significant ( P  = 0.001) lower number of opioids were used by the Cold-group during the acute postoperative phase of 4 days, 47 and 83 tablets for respectively the Cold and Warm-group. No difference could be observed for secondary outcomes and adverse effects between both study groups. Conclusions Postoperative CAC can be in added value in patients following an outpatient surgery pathway for TKA, resulting in reduced experienced pain and consumption of opioids during the first postoperative days.

Purpose Patients-specific instruments (PSI) for implantation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be used to predict the implant size for both the femur and the tibia component. This study aims to determine the impact of approval of the PSI planning for TKA on the frequency of, and reason for intraoperative changes of implant sizes. Methods The clinical records of 293 patients operated with MRI- (90.4 %) and CT-based (9.6 %) PSI were reviewed for actual used implant size. Preoperative default planning from the technician and approved planning by the operating surgeon were compared with the intraoperative implanted component size for both the femur and tibia. Intraoperative reason for not following the default sizes was outdated. Furthermore, MRI- and CT-based PSI were compared for these outcomes. Results In 93.9 and 91.1 % for, respectively, the femur and tibia (n.s.), the surgeon planned size was implanted during surgery. The predicted size of the femur ( p  < 0.00) and the tibia ( p  < 0.00) component planned by a technician differed from the implanted component sizes in 62 (21.2 %) and 51 (17.4 %) patients, respectively. In 17 cases, the femoral component size was adapted intraoperative based on the expert opinion of the operating surgeon. In 26 cases, the tibia component was changed during the surgery because of a mediolateral overhang, sclerotic bone, medial or lateral release, limited extension and/or fixed varus deformity. The results between the MRI- and CT-based PSI did not differ (n.s.). Conclusions PSI is a tool to help the surgeon to achieve the best possible results during TKA. The planning made by a technician should always be validated and approved by the operating surgeon who has the ultimate responsibility regarding the operation. With PSI, the operating surgeon is able to minimize intraoperative implant size errors in advance to improve operating room efficiency with possible lowering hospital costs per procedure. Levels of evidence III.

Purpose The aim of this two-centre RCT was to compare pre- and post-operative radiological, clinical and functional outcomes between patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) and conventional instrumented (CI) unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). It was hypothesised that both alignment methods would have comparable post-operative radiological, clinical and functional outcomes. Methods One hundred and twenty patients were included, and randomly allocated to the PSI or the CI group. Outcome measures were peri-operative outcomes (operation time, length of hospital stay and intra-operative changes of implant size) and post-operative radiological outcomes including the alignment of the tibial and femoral component in the sagittal and frontal plane and the hip–knee–ankle-axis (HKA-axis), rate of adverse events (AEs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) pre-operatively and at 3, 12 and 24 months post-operatively. Results There was a statistically significant difference ( p  < 0.05) in alignment of the femoral component in the frontal plane in favour of the CI method. No statistically significant differences were found for the peri-operative data or in the functional outcome at 2-year follow-up. In the PSI group, the approved implant size of the femoral component was correct in 98.2% of the cases and the tibial component was correct in 60.7% of the cases. There was a comparable rate of AEs: 5.1% in the CI and 5.4% in the PSI group. Conclusion The PSI method did not show an advantage over CI in regard of positioning of the components, nor did it show an improvement in clinical or functional outcome. We conclude that the possible advantages of PSI do not outweigh the costs of the MRI scan and the manufacturing of the PSI. Level of evidence Randomised controlled trial, level I.

Purpose To plan for the continuance of elective hip and knee arthroplasty during a resurgence or new wave of COVID-19 infections. Method A systematic review was conducted using the terms “COVID-19” or “SARS-Cov-2” and “second wave”. No relevant citations were found to inform on recommendations the plan. Therefore, an expert panel of the European Hip Society and the European Knee Associates was formed to provide the recommendations. Results Overall, the recommendations consider three phases; review of the first wave, preparation for the next wave, and during the next wave. International and national policies will drive most of the management. The recommendations focus on the preparation phase and, in particular, the actions that the individual surgeon needs to undertake to continue with, and practice, elective arthroplasty during the next wave, as well as planning their personal and their family’s lives. The recommendations expect rigorous data collection during the next wave, so that a cycle of continuous improvement is created to take account of any future waves. Conclusions The recommendations for planning to continue elective hip and knee arthroplasty during a new phase of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic provide a framework to reduce the risk of a complete shutdown of elective surgery. This involves engaging with hospital managers and other specialities in the planning process. Individuals have responsibilities to themselves, their colleagues, and their families, beyond the actual delivery of elective arthroplasty.