In a series of 1304 patients (1867 knees), the results of simultaneous and staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty were compared with each other and with unilateral total knee arthroplasty. The bilateral procedures had a significantly higher rate of complications than unilateral procedures, almost entirely because of thromboembolic problems. However, this did not correspond to an increase in mortality. If a bilateral procedure was indicated, then a simultaneous procedure had no increased risk over a staged procedure. There was no increase in cardiovascular complications, the rate of deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism or mortality. The rate of infection was lower with a bilateral procedure and the overall revision rate was less than 1% in all groups. The prosthesis functioned as well in all groups in the medium and longer term periods.

We feel that simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty is a safe and successful procedure when compared with a staged bilateral procedure. It also has the added benefit of single anaesthetic, reduced costs and decreased total recovery time when compared to a staged bilateral procedure. For these reasons it should be considered as an option in the presence of bilateral knee joint disease.

Stiffness is an uncommon but potentially debilitating complication following total knee replacement (TKR). The treatment of this condition remains difficult and controversial. We present the results of 13 patients who underwent open arthrolysis for stiffness. The mean time between TKR and arthrolysis was 14 months. The mean follow-up was 7.2 years (2 to 10). The mean range of movement prior to arthrolysis was 55°. This increased to 91°, six months after arthrolysis (p < 0.005). The improved range of movement was maintained during the follow-up period. No patient has required revision of their components. We have found arthrolysis to be a useful and successful approach to post-TKR stiffness.

We prospectively reviewed 1000 consecutive patients who underwent a cementless, hydroxyapatite-coated, stemless, total knee replacement over a period of nine years. Regular post-operative clinical follow-up was performed using the Knee Society score. The mean pre-operative score was 96, improving to 182 and 180 at five and ten years, respectively. To date, there have been seven (0.5%) cases which required revision, primarily for septic loosening (four cases), with low rates of other post-operative complications. The cumulative survival at ten years with revision as the end-point, was 99.14% (95% confidence interval 92.5 to 99.8). These results support the use of hydroxyapatite in a cementless total knee replacement since it can give reliable fixation with an excellent clinical and functional outcome.

We have carried out a prospective study comparing the results at five years in patients older than 75 years of age undergoing hydroxyapatite-coated, cementless total knee replacement (TKR) with those who were younger. The Knee Society clinical rating scores were recorded before and after operation. Of 559 patients undergoing TKR, 135 were in the elderly age group. The knee scores at five years or more showed comparable results, with patients under 75 years of age reaching a score of 183 and those aged 75 years or over reaching 174. These differences were predominantly due to the functional component of the score. We conclude that elderly patients do just as well as the younger group using this prosthesis.

Infection is a potentially disastrous complication of total knee replacement (TKR). Retention of the prosthesis has been associated with high rates of persistent infection. Our study shows that in selected situations, arthroscopic debridement may allow retention of the prosthesis and eradication of the infection. However, the prosthesis must be stable, the surgical technique must be meticulous and specific antibiotics must be taken for a lengthy period. Arthroscopic debridement should be considered as an alternative to an open technique, or revision, for the infected TKR.

We have investigated the ability to kneel after total knee replacement. We asked 75 patients (100 knees) at least six months after routine uncemented primary total knee replacement, to comment on and to demonstrate their ability to kneel. Differences between the perceived and actual ability to kneel were noted. In 32 knees patients stated that they could kneel without significant discomfort. In 54 knees patients avoided kneeling because of uncertainties or recommendations from third parties (doctors, nursing staff, friends, etc). A total of 64 patients was actually able to kneel without discomfort or with mild discomfort only and 12 of the remainder were unable to kneel because of problems which were not related to the knee. Twenty-four patients therefore were unable to kneel because of discomfort in the knee.

There was no difference between the ‘kneelers’ and ‘non-kneelers’ with regard to overall knee score, range of movement and the presence of patellar resurfacing.