Demographics, Indications, and Revision Rates for Radial Head Arthroplasty: Analysis of Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: Population-level data from national arthroplasty registries enable the use and outcomes of arthroplasty procedures to be monitored over time. This study aimed to describe the demographics, indications, and outcomes (up to 15 years) for radial head arthroplasty (RHA) procedures in Australia, as well as the factors associated with an increased likelihood of revision. METHODS: Individual-level deidentified data on demographics and surgery characteristics, including revision surgery, were obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry for all primary isolated RHA procedures that had been performed from 2007 to 2021. The probability of prosthesis survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for revision. RESULTS: A total of 3,457 primary RHAs were performed during the study period (mean follow-up, 5.6 years; range, 0 to 15 years). The mean age at the time of RHA was 53 years, with female predominance (n = 2,009, 58%). The most common indication for RHA was fracture or dislocation (n = 3,166, 92%), followed by osteoarthritis (n = 232, 7%). The radial head prostheses that were most commonly used were monopolar (n = 3,378, 98%) with a modular design (n = 3,442, 99.6%) and cementless fixation (n = 3,387, 98%). Both metallic and nonmetallic prostheses were used (52% and 48%, respectively). Of the total cohort, 160 revisions (5%) were performed during the 15-year period; most revisions occurred in the first 5 years. The most common revision indication was prosthesis loosening (n = 62, 39%), and 54% of the revisions (n = 87) involved a change of the radial component. In multivariable analysis, primary procedures for osteoarthritis (HR, 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 2.70) or "other" indications (e.g., inflammatory arthritis, osteonecrosis, or tumor) were revised more frequently (HR, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.14 to 11.91) than procedures for fracture or dislocation. Procedures with nonmetallic prostheses had higher rates of revision (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.17 to 2.22) than those with metallic prostheses. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma remained the most prevalent indication for RHA in Australia from 2007 to 2021. Encouragingly, revision rates were low, most notably for RHA that had been performed for fracture or dislocation. The likelihood of revision was highest for RHA procedures performed for osteoarthritis and for an indication other than osteoarthritis or trauma. Nonmetallic prostheses had a higher rate of revision than metallic prostheses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

What Are the Relative Associations of Surgeon Performance and Prosthesis Quality With THA Revision Rates?

BACKGROUND: Many factors, including some related to the patient, implant selection, and the surgeon's skill and expertise, likely contribute to the risk of THA revision. However, surgeon factors have not been extensively analyzed in national joint replacement registries, and there is limited insight into their potential as a confounding variable for revision outcomes; for example, if surgeons with higher revision rates choose more successful prostheses, would this alone reduce their revision rate? QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study used Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) data for patients receiving primary THA for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis to answer the following questions: (1) Will the difference in revision rates among surgeons change or disappear when only procedures performed with the best prostheses or prostheses that have been identified as having higher revision rates are considered? (2) Is the benefit associated with using the best-performing prostheses different among surgeons with different revision rates? (3) Do the reasons for revision differ between surgeons with higher rates of revision compared with surgeons with lower rates of revision? METHODS: All primary THA procedures performed and recorded in the AOANJRR for osteoarthritis from September 1, 1999, to December 31, 2022, were considered for inclusion. Each THA prosthesis used was categorized per the AOANJRR as superior-performing, middle-performing, or identified as having a higher rate of revision by the AOANJRR benchmarking process. Surgeons who had performed at least 50 procedures and had a recorded 2-year cumulative percent revision (CPR) were included. After applying these restrictions, the study consisted of 302,066 procedures performed by 476 known surgeons. For the primary outcome measure of all-cause revision, we examined the variation in all-cause revision rates across individual surgeons when different classes of devices were used to assess whether differences between surgeons persisted when accounting for prosthesis selection. For the purposes of descriptively comparing reasons for revision between surgeons with higher-than-average or lower-than-average risk of revision, surgeons were classified into quartiles and outcomes compared when these surgeons used the same class of prosthesis. RESULTS: The difference in rates of revision among surgeons remained even after accounting for the effects of the prosthesis used. For any given surgeon, identified prostheses were associated with higher revision rates compared with both superior-performing prostheses (HR 1.73 [95% CI 1.57 to 1.92]; p < 0.01) and medium-performing prostheses (HR 1.31 [95% CI 1.20 to 1.43]; p < 0.01). All surgeons demonstrated a lower revision rate when using a superior-performing prosthesis, but the difference was greatest for surgeons with the highest rates of revision. Surgeons with the lowest rates of revision had a 19-year CPR of 3.9% (95% CI 3.0% to 5.0%) when using a superior-performing prosthesis compared with 5.4% (95% CI 4.0% to 7.3%) for procedures in which an identified prosthesis was used. Surgeons with the highest rates of revision had a 19-year CPR of 10.9% (95% CI 8.6% to 13.8%) when using a superior-performing prosthesis, and this increased to 20.4% (95% CI 18.0% to 23.1%) for procedures in which an identified prosthesis was used. The reasons for revision differ between surgeons, with causes of revision likely preventable and not related to the prosthesis choice being apparent for surgeons with high revision rates. CONCLUSION: The choice of implant and the surgeon performing the index procedure both affected the risk of revision as well as the reasons for revision. Surgeons could improve the survivorship of the arthroplasties they perform by choosing implants identified by registries as having lower revision rates. Acceptance of the fact that surgeons have different revision rates is needed, and detailed analysis is required to explain why surgeons with high revision rates have increased rates of likely preventable revisions, and outside of prosthesis choice, how revision rates can be lowered. The influence of training, fellowship completion, ongoing education, patient selection, indications for surgery, and factors underlying prosthesis decision-making should be assessed. The surgeon performing THA is an important confounder that should be considered in future registry analyses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty With or Without Antibiotic Bone Cement.

Importance: Despite increased use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in joint arthroplasty over recent decades, current evidence for prophylactic use of ALBC to reduce risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is insufficient. Objective: To compare the rate of revision attributed to PJI following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using ALBC vs plain bone cement. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international cohort study used data from 14 national or regional joint arthroplasty registries in Australia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the UK, and the US. The study included primary TKAs for osteoarthritis registered from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, and followed-up until December 31, 2021. Data analysis was performed from April to September 2023. Exposure: Primary TKA with ALBC vs plain bone cement. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was risk of 1-year revision for PJI. Using a distributed data network analysis method, data were harmonized, and a cumulative revision rate was calculated (1 - Kaplan-Meier), and Cox regression analyses were performed within the 10 registries using both cement types. A meta-analysis was then performed to combine all aggregated data and evaluate the risk of 1-year revision for PJI and all causes. Results: Among 2 168 924 TKAs included, 93% were performed with ALBC. Most TKAs were performed in female patients (59.5%) and patients aged 65 to 74 years (39.9%), fully cemented (92.2%), and in the 2015 to 2020 period (62.5%). All participating registries reported a cumulative 1-year revision rate for PJI of less than 1% following primary TKA with ALBC (range, 0.21%-0.80%) and with plain bone cement (range, 0.23%-0.70%). The meta-analyses based on adjusted Cox regression for 1 917 190 TKAs showed no statistically significant difference at 1 year in risk of revision for PJI (hazard rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.89-1.52) or for all causes (hazard rate ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.89-1.40) among TKAs performed with ALBC vs plain bone cement. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the risk of revision for PJI was similar between ALBC and plain bone cement following primary TKA. Any additional costs of ALBC and its relative value in reducing revision risk should be considered in the context of the overall health care delivery system.

Comparable low revision rates of stemmed and stemless total anatomic shoulder arthroplasties after exclusion of metal-backed glenoid components: a collaboration between the Australian and Danish national shoulder arthroplasty registries.

BACKGROUND: The stemmed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty is the gold standard in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. However, the use of stemless total shoulder arthroplasties has increased in recent years. The number of revision procedures are relatively low, and therefore it has been recommended that national joint replacement registries should collaborate when comparing revision rates. Therefore, we aimed to compare the revision rates of stemmed and stemless TSA used for the diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis using data from both the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) and the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (DSR). METHODS: We included all patients who were registered in the AOANJRR and the DSR from January 1, 2012, to December 2021 with an anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty used for osteoarthritis. Revision for any reason was used as the primary outcome. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to illustrate the cumulative revision rates and a multivariate cox regression model to calculate the hazard ratios. All analyses were performed separately for data from AOANJRR and DSR, and the results were then reported using a qualitative approach. RESULTS: A total of 13,066 arthroplasties from AOANJRR and 2882 arthroplasties from DSR were included. The hazard ratio for revision of stemmed TSA with stemless TSA as reference, adjusted for age and gender, was 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-2.09, P < .001) in AOANJRR and 0.57 (95% CI 0.36-0.89, P = .014) in DSR. When including glenoid type and fixation, surface bearing (only in AOANJRR), and hospital volume in the cox regression model, the hazard ratio for revision of stemmed TSA compared to stemless TSA was 1.22 (95% CI 0.85-1.75, P = .286) in AOANJRR and 1.50 (95% CI 0.91-2.45, P = .109) in DSR. The adjusted hazard ratio for revision of total shoulder arthroplasties with metal-backed glenoid components compared to all-polyethylene glenoid components was 2.54 (95% CI 1.70-3.79, P < .001) in AOANJRR and 4.1 (95% CI 1.92-8.58, P < .001) in DSR. CONCLUSION: Based on data from 2 national shoulder arthroplasty registries, we found no significant difference in risk of revision between stemmed and stemless total shoulder arthroplasties after adjusting for the type of glenoid component. We advocate that metal-backed glenoid components should be used with caution and not on a routine basis.

First knee for pain and function versus second knee for quality of life.

Aims: The aim of this study was to describe and compare joint-specific and generic health-related quality of life outcomes of the first versus second knee in patients undergoing staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) for osteoarthritis. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used Australian national arthroplasty registry data from January 2013 to January 2021 to identify participants who underwent elective staged BTKA with six to 24 months between procedures. The primary outcome was Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at six months postoperatively for the first TKA compared to the second TKA, adjusted for age and sex. Secondary outcomes compared six-month EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) domain scores, EQ-5D index scores, and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) between knees at six months postoperatively. Results: The cohort included 635 participants (1,270 primary procedures). Preoperative scores were worse in the first knee compared to the second for all instruments; however, comparing the first knee at six months postoperatively with the second knee at six months postoperatively, the mean between-knee difference was minimal for OKS (-0.8 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.4 to -0.2), EQ-VAS (3.3; 95% CI 1.9 to 4.7), and EQ-5D index (0.09 points; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.12). Outcomes for the EQ-5D-5L domains 'mobility', 'usual activities', and 'pain/discomfort' were better following the second TKA. Conclusion: At six months postoperatively, there were no clinically meaningful differences between the first and second TKA in either the joint-specific or overall generic health-related quality of life outcomes. However, individual domain scores assessing mobility, pain, and usual activities were notably higher after the second TKA, likely reflecting the cumulative improvement in quality of life after both knees have been replaced.

Utilizing Stems in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Analysis of the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry Data.

BACKGROUND: We compared revision rates and reasons for revision for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed for osteoarthritis with and without tibial stem extensions. METHODS: Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry were used to compare all-cause revision, reason, and type of revision between primary TKA using stemmed tibial prostheses and non-stemmed prostheses. RESULTS: All-cause revision for TKA with stem extension was higher for the first 6 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI]1.19 to 1.82; P < .001); while after 1.5 years TKA with stem extension had a lower rate of revision (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.97; P = .01). Stemmed components were more likely to be revised for infection between 3 months and 1.5 years after surgery (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.83; P = .02). The revision rate for aseptic loosening was lower in the stemmed group beyond 2 years (HR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.63; P < .001). Insert-only revision was higher in the stemmed group at all times (HR = 1.42; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.66, P < .001). Isolated tibial component revision was lower in the stemmed group at all times (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.74; P = .001). Aseptic loosening for tibial component-only revision was significantly lower in the stemmed group at all times (HR 0.23; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.50; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing primary stemmed TKA have lower rates of all-cause revision beyond 1.5 years and tibial component-only revision at all times. Further investigation is required to preoperatively select patients that benefit from augmentation with stems.

Lower Revision Rates and Improved Stability With a Monoblock Ceramic Acetabular Cup.

BACKGROUND: Monoblock ceramic cups are designed to accommodate large-diameter femoral heads. This has the potential to offer the advantages of an increased range of motion and enhanced joint stability. These features could benefit younger and high-demand patients in need of total hip arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the survival rate and the reasons for revision of the DeltaMotion cup. METHODS: Data from the AOANJRR were analyzed for all patients who had undergone a primary conventional THA performed between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2021. Only prostheses with ceramic/ceramic, ceramic/XLPE, metal/XLPE, or CM/XLPE bearing surfaces were included. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative percent revision for all causes. Secondary outcome measures were revision for dislocation/instability, ceramic breakage, or noise. A subanalysis for cup size was also performed. RESULTS: There were 486,946 primary conventional THA procedures undertaken for any reason. Of these, 4,033 used the DeltaMotion cup and 482,913 were modular designs. The DeltaMotion cup had the lowest CPR for all diagnoses compared to the modular bearings at all time points, had a significantly lower revision rate for prosthesis dislocation and no revisions for squeaking compared to other modular bearings. There were 175 ceramic breakages recorded in the modular bearing group and 1 ceramic breakage in the DeltaMotion group. CONCLUSIONS: The DeltaMotion cup had a low rate of all-cause revision, and for dislocation, ceramic breakage, and noise. Although this cup is no longer manufactured, ongoing follow-up of newer monoblock ceramic cups will determine their suitability for younger and more active patients.

A Polished Cobalt-Chrome Baseplate is not Associated With a Lower Revision Rate Than Matt Titanium in a Single Total Knee Arthroplasty Implant System With Identical Baseplate Design.

BACKGROUND: Polished baseplates were introduced into total knee arthroplasty (TKA) systems to reduce the incidence of backside wear. In 2004, a fixed-bearing knee arthroplasty system underwent a change in baseplate material from matt titanium to polished cobalt-chrome (CoCr) with the intention to reduce backside wear. Other design aspects were left unchanged. The aim of this study was to compare these implants with each baseplate using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. METHODS: Primary TKA procedures performed between January 2010 and December 2021 for osteoarthritis, using a single design with cross-linked polyethylene inserts and matt titanium or polished CoCr baseplates, were analyzed. The primary outcome was all-cause revision, summarized using Kaplan-Meier estimates, with age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratios estimated from Cox proportional hazards models. In total, there were 2,091 procedures with matt titanium and 2,519 procedures with polished CoCr baseplates. RESULTS: The 9-year cumulative percent revision was 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8 to 3.5%) and 4.2% (95% CI 3.1 to 5.6%) for the matt titanium and CoCr groups, respectively. Compared to matt titanium, the revision rate of CoCr baseplates was not significantly higher (hazard ratio 1.44; 95% CI 0.96 to 2.15; P = .076). CONCLUSIONS: Polished CoCr baseplates in a single TKA system were not associated with reduced all-cause revision rates compared to matt titanium up to 11 years post-TKA. Our results suggest that the predicted reduction in wear particle debris production from polished CoCr baseplates may not correlate with reduced revision rates in vivo, but further evaluation is required.

A comparison of revision rates for stemmed and stemless primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty with all-polyethylene glenoid components: analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: We compared the rate of all-cause revision of 2 classes of primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty, stemmed (stTSA) and stemless (slTSA), undertaken with cemented all-polyethylene glenoid components. METHODS: A large national arthroplasty registry identified 2 cohort groups for comparison, stTSA and l undertaken for all diagnoses between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2021. A subanalysis from January 1, 2017, allowed capturing of additional patient demographics including American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, and glenoid morphology. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age and gender. RESULTS: Of the 7995 stTSA procedures, the CPR at 9 years was 5.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.0, 6.4), and for 3156 slTSA procedures, the CPR was 4.4% (95% CI: 3.6, 5.5). There was no significant difference in the rate of revision between the study groups (HR = 0.76 [95% CI: 0.51, 1.14], P = .189, adjusted for age, gender, humeral head size, humeral fixation, bearing surface, glenoid design, and mean surgeon volume [MSV]). There was an increased rate of revision for stTSA and slTSA undertaken with humeral head sizes <44 mm (stTSA <44 mm vs. 44-50 mm, HR = 1.56 [CI: 1.18, 2.08], P = .001; slTSA <44 mm vs. 44-50 mm, HR = 2.08 [CI: 1.32, 3.33], P = .001). MSV as a continuous predictor was not a revision risk to stTSA vs. slTSA, but categorically, a low MSV (<10 stTSA + slTSA cases per annum) was associated with a higher revision rate for stTSA (10-20 cases/yr vs. <10 cases/yr, HR = 0.72 [CI: 0.55, 0.95], P = .019) but was not in slTSA. Revision rates were increased for stTSA with non-crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) glenoids vs. XPLE after 2 years (HR = 2.20 [CI: 1.57, 3.08], P < .001) but did not significantly differ for slTSA. Metal/XPLE (humeral/glenoid) bearing surface of stTSA rate of revision was not different from each combination of slTSA bearing surface. Instability/dislocation was a revision risk for slTSA vs. stTSA (HR = 1.93 [CI: 1.28, 2.91], P = .001), but from 2017, neither of American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, and glenoid morphology changed the rate of revision. CONCLUSIONS: Revision rates of stTSA and slTSA did not significantly differ and were associated with humeral head size but not patient characteristics. Surgeon inexperience of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty and non-XLPE glenoids were risk factors for stTSA revision but not slTSA. The metal/XLPE stTSA rate of revision was not found to differ significantly from slTSA regardless of polyethylene or humeral head bearing type. Revision for instability/dislocation was more common for slTSA.

Stemmed Tibial Fixation for Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in Obese Patients-A National Registry Study.

BACKGROUND: We investigated if the use of augmented tibial fixation with stems in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in obese patients was associated with a difference in reason for revision, type of revision, or overall revision rate. METHODS: Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry compared reason for revision, rate, and type of revision between primary TKA using stemmed tibial prostheses to nonstemmed prostheses, stratified by body mass index (BMI) and obesity. The cumulative percent revision was obtained using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for age and sex with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All tests were 2-tailed at 5% statistical significance (P < .05). There were 66,508 procedures available for analyses. RESULTS: Obese class 2 (BMI 35 to 39.99) had higher rates of revision in the stemmed group compared to the nonstemmed group (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.00, 2.05, P = .047). There was no significant difference in revision rates between stemmed and nonstemmed tibial prostheses in any other BMI group. Primary TKA in obese patients (BMI ≥30) with a stem extension had a significantly higher rate of minor revisions compared to no stem extension (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.03, 1.66, P = .025). There was no significant difference between stemmed and nonstemmed groups for major revision in obese patients and for minor or major revision in nonobese patients. CONCLUSION: Using a tibial stem during primary TKA in obese patients is not associated with a lower rate of revision.

The use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and systemic antibiotic prophylactic use in 2,971,357 primary total knee arthroplasties from 2010 to 2020: an international register-based observational study among countries in Africa, Europe, North America, and Oceania.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) and systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) have been used to reduce periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. We investigated the use of ALBC and SAP in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational study is based on 2,971,357 primary TKAs reported in 2010-2020 to national/regional joint arthroplasty registries in Australia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. Aggregate-level data on trends and types of bone cement, antibiotic agents, and doses and duration of SAP used was extracted from participating registries. RESULTS: ALBC was used in 77% of the TKAs with variation ranging from 100% in Norway to 31% in the USA. Palacos R+G was the most common (62%) ALBC type used. The primary antibiotic used in ALBC was gentamicin (94%). Use of ALBC in combination with SAP was common practice (77%). Cefazolin was the most common (32%) SAP agent. The doses and duration of SAP used varied from one single preoperative dosage as standard practice in Bolzano, Italy (98%) to 1-day 4 doses in Norway (83% of the 40,709 TKAs reported to the Norwegian arthroplasty register). CONCLUSION: The proportion of ALBC usage in primary TKA varies internationally, with gentamicin being the most common antibiotic. ALBC in combination with SAP was common practice, with cefazolin the most common SAP agent. The type of ALBC and type, dose, and duration of SAP varied among participating countries.

Do the Revision Rates of Arthroplasty Surgeons Correlate With Postoperative Patient-reported Outcome Measure Scores? A Study From the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are a pragmatic and efficient means to evaluate the functional quality of arthroplasty beyond revision rates, which are used by most joint replacement registries to judge success. The relationship between these two measures of quality-revision rates and PROMs-is unknown, and not every procedure with a poor functional result is revised. It is logical-although still untested-that higher cumulative revision rates correlate inversely with PROMs for individual surgeons; more revisions are associated with lower PROM scores. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We used data from a large national joint replacement registry to ask: (1) Does a surgeon's early THA cumulative percent revision (CPR) rate and (2) early TKA CPR rate correlate with the postoperative PROMs of patients undergoing primary THA and TKA, respectively, who have not undergone revision? METHODS: Elective primary THA and TKA procedures in patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis that were performed between August 2018 and December 2020 and registered in the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry PROMs program were eligible. THAs and TKAs were eligible for inclusion in the primary analysis if 6-month postoperative PROMs were available, the operating surgeon was clearly identified, and the surgeon had performed at least 50 primary THAs or TKAs. Based on the inclusion criteria, 17,668 THAs were performed at eligible sites. We excluded 8878 procedures that were not matched to the PROMs program, leaving 8790 procedures. A further 790 were excluded because they were performed by unknown or ineligible surgeons or were revised, leaving 8000 procedures performed by 235 eligible surgeons, including 4256 (53%; 3744 cases of missing data) patients who had postoperative Oxford Hip Scores and 4242 (53%; 3758 cases of missing data) patients who had a postoperative EQ-VAS score recorded. Complete covariate data were available for 3939 procedures for the Oxford Hip Score and for 3941 procedures for the EQ-VAS. A total of 26,624 TKAs were performed at eligible sites. We excluded 12,685 procedures that were not matched to the PROMs program, leaving 13,939 procedures. A further 920 were excluded because they were performed by unknown or ineligible surgeons, or because they were revisions, leaving 13,019 procedures performed by 276 eligible surgeons, including 6730 (52%; 6289 cases of missing data) patients who had had postoperative Oxford Knee Scores and 6728 (52%; 6291 cases of missing data) patients who had a postoperative EQ-VAS score recorded. Complete covariate data were available for 6228 procedures for the Oxford Knee Score and for 6241 procedures for the EQ-VAS. The Spearman correlation between the operating surgeon's 2-year CPR and 6-month postoperative EQ-VAS Health and Oxford Hip or Oxford Knee Score was evaluated for THA and TKA procedures where a revision had not been performed. Associations between postoperative Oxford and EQ-VAS scores and a surgeon's 2-year CPR were estimated based on multivariate Tobit regressions and a cumulative link model with a probit link, adjusting for patient age, gender, ASA score, BMI category, preoperative PROMs, as well as surgical approach for THA. Missing data were accounted for using multiple imputation, with models assuming they were missing at random and a worst-case scenario. RESULTS: Of the eligible THA procedures, postoperative Oxford Hip Score and surgeon 2-year CPR were correlated so weakly as to be clinically irrelevant (Spearman correlation ρ = -0.09; p < 0.001), and the correlation with postoperative EQ-VAS was close to zero (ρ = -0.02; p = 0.25). Of the eligible TKA procedures, postoperative Oxford Knee Score and EQ-VAS and surgeon 2-year CPR were correlated so weakly as to be clinically irrelevant (ρ = -0.04; p = 0.004 and ρ = 0.03; p = 0.006, respectively). All models accounting for missing data found the same result. CONCLUSION: A surgeon's 2-year CPR did not exhibit a clinically relevant correlation with PROMs after THA or TKA, and all surgeons had similar postoperative Oxford scores. PROMs, revision rates, or both may be inaccurate or imperfect indicators of successful arthroplasty. Missing data may limit the findings of this study, although the results were consistent under a variety of different missing data scenarios. Innumerable factors contribute to arthroplasty results, including patient-related variables, differences in implant design, and the technical quality of the procedure. PROMs and revision rates may be analyzing two different facets of function after arthroplasty. Although surgeon variables are associated with revision rates, patient factors may exert a stronger influence on functional outcomes. Future research should identify variables that correlate with functional outcome. Additionally, given the gross level of function that Oxford scores record, outcome measures that can identify clinically meaningful functional differences are required. The use of Oxford scores in national arthroplasty registries may rightfully be questioned. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Systematic calculation of finite-time mixed singular vectors and characterization of error growth for persistent coherent atmospheric disturbances over Eurasia.

Singular vectors (SVs) have long been employed in the initialization of ensemble numerical weather prediction (NWP) in order to capture the structural organization and growth rates of those perturbations or "errors" associated with initial condition errors and instability processes of the large scale flow. Due to their (super) exponential growth rates and spatial scales, initial SVs are typically combined empirically with evolved SVs in order to generate forecast perturbations whose structures and growth rates are tuned for specified lead-times. Here, we present a systematic approach to generating finite time or "mixed" SVs (MSVs) based on a method for the calculation of covariant Lyapunov vectors and appropriate choices of the matrix cocycle. We first derive a data-driven reduced-order model to characterize persistent geopotential height anomalies over Europe and Western Asia (Eurasia) over the period 1979-present from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction v1 reanalysis. We then characterize and compare the MSVs and SVs of each persistent state over Eurasia for particular lead-times from a day to over a week. Finally, we compare the spatiotemporal properties of SVs and MSVs in an examination of the dynamics of the 2010 Russian heatwave. We show that MSVs provide a systematic approach to generate initial forecast perturbations projected onto relevant expanding directions in phase space for typical NWP forecast lead-times.