header advert
Results 1 - 7 of 7
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 5 | Pages 338 - 356
10 May 2023
Belt M Robben B Smolders JMH Schreurs BW Hannink G Smulders K

Aims

To map literature on prognostic factors related to outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), to identify extensively studied factors and to guide future research into what domains need further exploration.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. The search string included multiple synonyms of the following keywords: "revision TKA", "outcome" and "prognostic factor". We searched for studies assessing the association between at least one prognostic factor and at least one outcome measure after rTKA surgery. Data on sample size, study design, prognostic factors, outcomes, and the direction of the association was extracted and included in an evidence map.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 7 | Pages 859 - 866
1 Jul 2022
Innocenti M Smulders K Willems JH Goosen JHM van Hellemondt G

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between reason for revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and outcomes in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

Methods

We reviewed a prospective cohort of 647 patients undergoing full or partial rTHA at a single high-volume centre with a minimum of two years’ follow-up. The reasons for revision were classified as: infection; aseptic loosening; dislocation; structural failure; and painful THA for other reasons. PROMs (modified Oxford Hip Score (mOHS), EuroQol five-dimension three-level health questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) score, and visual analogue scales for pain during rest and activity), complication rates, and failure rates were compared among the groups.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 4 | Pages 464 - 471
1 Apr 2022
Veerman K Raessens J Telgt D Smulders K Goosen JHM

Aims

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a widely accepted form of surgical treatment for patients with an early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary arthroplasty. The outcome of DAIR after revision arthroplasty, however, has not been reported. The aim of this study was to report the success rate of DAIR after revision arthroplasty with a follow-up of two years.

Methods

This retrospective study, conducted at the Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, included 88 patients who underwent DAIR within 90 days of revision total hip or total knee arthroplasty between 2012 and 2019. Details of the surgical procedures and PJI were collected. Univariate analysis and a subgroup analysis of the culture-positive group were performed. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were constructed.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_14 | Pages 42 - 42
1 Nov 2021
van Hellemondt G Innocenti M Smulders K Willems J Goosen J
Full Access

We designed a study to evaluate whether (1) there were differences in PROMs between different reasons for revision THA at baseline, (2) there was a different interaction effect for revision THA for all PROMs, and (3) complication and re-revision rates differ between reason for revision THA.

Prospective cohort of 647 patients undergoing rTHA, with a minimum of 2 years FU. The reason for revision were classified as infection, aseptic loosening, dislocation, structural failure and painful THA with uncommon causes. PROMs (EQ-5D score, Oxford hip score (OHS), VAS pain, complication and failure rates were compared between different groups.

Patients with different reason for revision had improvement of PROMs’ over time. Preoperatively, patients revised due to infection and aseptic loosening had poorer OHS and EQ-5D than patients with other reason for revision. Pain scores at baseline were highest in patients revised due to dislocation. Infection and aseptic loosening groups also showed a significant interaction effect over time in both OHS and EQ-5D. No PROMs significant differences between groups were observed 2 years postoperatively. Overall complications, and re-revision rates were 35.4 and 9.7% respectively.

The reason for revision THA did not associate with clinical outcomes. Good outcomes were reached regardless of the reason for revision, as patients with the poorest pre-operative scores had the best improvement in PROMs over time. Complication and re-operation rates were relatively high, in line with previous reports, but did not differ between different reasons for revision THA.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 34 - 34
1 Feb 2021
Boekesteijn R Smolders J Busch V Smulders K Geurts A
Full Access

Introduction

Wearable sensors are promising tools for fast clinical gait evaluations in individuals with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee and hip. However, gait assessments with wearable sensor are often limited to relatively simple straight-ahead walking paradigms. Parameters reflecting more complex and relevant aspects of gait, including dual-tasking, turning, and compensatory upper body motion are often overlooked in literature. The aim of this study was to investigate turning, dual-task performance, and upper body motion in individuals with knee or hip OA in addition to spatiotemporal gait parameters, taking shared covariance between gait parameters into account.

Methods

Gait was compared between individuals with unilateral knee (n=25) or hip (n=26) OA scheduled for joint replacement, and healthy controls (n=27). For 2 minutes, subjects walked back-and-forth a 6 meter trajectory making 180 degree turns, with and without a secondary cognitive task. Gait parameters were collected using four inertial measurement units on feet, waist, and trunk. To test if turning, dual-tasking, and upper body motion had added value above common spatiotemporal parameters, a factor analysis was conducted. Standardized mean differences were computed for the comparison between knee or hip OA and healthy controls. One gait parameter was selected per gait domain based on factor loading and effect size for the comparison between OA groups and healthy controls.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 26 - 26
1 Apr 2019
Smulders K Bongers J Nijhof M
Full Access

Aim

The aim of this study is to evaluate if obesity negatively affects: (1) complication rate, (2) reoperation and revision rate and (3) functional outcome (based on patient reported outcome measures, PROMs) in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). To our knowledge this is the only recent study to prospectively review these three aspects in what might be considered challenging rTHA.

Methods

444 rTHAs (cup, stem, both, n= 265, 57, 122 respectively), performed in a specialized high-volume orthopaedic center from 2013 to 2015, were prospectively followed. Complications and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) were evaluated at 4 months, 1 year and 2 years. Thirtyfour patients had a BMI >35 kg/m2 (obese), of which thirteen patients with a BMI >40 kg/m2 (morbidly obese).


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_5 | Pages 88 - 88
1 Apr 2019
Smulders K Rensch PV Wymenga A Heesterbeek P Groen B
Full Access

Background

The cruciate ligaments are important structures for biomechanical stability of the knee. For total knee arthroplasty (TKA), understanding of the exact function of the (PCL) and anterior (ACL) cruciate ligament during walking is important in the light of recent designs of bicruciate TKAs. However, studies evaluating in vivo function of the PCL during daily activities such as walking are scarce. We aimed to assess the role of the PCL during gait by measuring kinematics and kinetics of individuals with PCL deficiency and compare them with individuals with ACL deficiency and healthy young adults.

Methods

Individuals with unilateral PCL deficiency (PCLD; n=9), unilateral ACL deficiency (n=10) and healthy young adults performed (n=10) 10 walk trials (5 for each leg) in which they walked over a force platform. Motion analysis (Vicon Motion Capture System) was used to calculate joint angles and internal moments around the knee, hip and ankle in the sagittal plane. Joint angles and moments of the injured knee (in PCLD and ACLD) or left knee (in HYA) were compared between groups at weight acceptance, mid-stance and push-off phases (see Fig. 1). Clinical assessment included passive knee laxity (Kneelax) for anterior (in 20–30° knee flexion) and posterior tibia translation (in 70–90° knee flexion) and Lysholm questionnaires.