Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorStirling, Paul
dc.contributor.authorMiddleton, Scott
dc.contributor.authorBrenkel, Ivan
dc.contributor.authorWalmsley, Phil
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-13T16:30:02Z
dc.date.available2020-03-13T16:30:02Z
dc.date.issued2020-03-13
dc.identifier.citationStirling , P , Middleton , S , Brenkel , I & Walmsley , P 2020 , ' Revision total knee replacement versus primary total knee replacement : a matched cohort study ' , Bone & Joint Open , vol. 1 , no. 3 , pp. 29-34 . https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.13.BJO-2019-0001.R1en
dc.identifier.issn2633-1462
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 266539947
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 5a722e3b-88a0-49c2-a260-d2355183a1b7
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/19656
dc.description.abstractIntroduction The primary aim of this study was to describe a baseline comparison of early knee-specific functional outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using metaphyseal sleeves with a matched cohort of patients undergoing primary TKA. The secondary aim was to compare incidence of complications and length of stay (LOS) between the two groups. Methods Patients undergoing revision TKA for all diagnoses between 2009 and 2016 had patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected prospectively. PROMs consisted of the American Knee Society Score (AKSS) and Short-Form 12 (SF-12). The study cohort was identified retrospectively and demographics were collected. The cohort was matched to a control group of patients undergoing primary TKA. Results Overall, 72 patients underwent revision TKA and were matched with 72 primary TKAs with a mean follow-up of 57 months (standard deviation (SD) 20 months). The only significant difference in postoperative PROMs was a worse AKSS pain score in the revision group (36 vs 44, p = 0.002); however, these patients still produced an improvement in the pain score. There was no significant difference in improvement of AKSS or SF-12 between the two groups. LOS (9.3 days vs 4.6 days) and operation time (1 hour 56 minutes vs 1 hour 7 minutes) were significantly higher in the revision group (p < 0.001). Patients undergoing revision were significantly more likely to require intraoperative lateral release and postoperative urinary catheterisation (p < 0.001). Conclusion This matched-cohort study provides results of revision TKA using modern techniques and implants and outlines what results patients can expect to achieve using primary TKA as a control. This should be useful to clinicians counselling patients for revision TKA.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofBone & Joint Openen
dc.rightsCopyright © 2020 Author(s) et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence (https:// creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by-nc-nd/4. 0/), which permits the copying and redistribution of the work only, and provided the original author and source are credited.en
dc.subjectRD Surgeryen
dc.subjectE-NDASen
dc.subject.lccRDen
dc.titleRevision total knee replacement versus primary total knee replacement : a matched cohort studyen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPublisher PDFen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of Medicineen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.13.BJO-2019-0001.R1
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record