RSA migration of unicondylar knee arthroplasties is comparable to migration of total knee arthroplasties: A meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Aseptic loosening is a major cause of failure for unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA). In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), early migration as measured with radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is a strong predictor of late revision for aseptic loosening of the tibial component. Migration in the first two years provides information on the fixation of an implant. However, the migration pattern of UKAs has not been systematically determined, and it is unclear if the migration pattern of UKAs is similar to that of TKAs. Therefore, the present meta-analysis aims to evaluate the migration patterns of tibial components of UKAs. EVIDENCE REVIEW: All RSA studies reporting on migration at two or more postoperative time-points following UKA were included. Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Embase were searched up to April 2021. The risk of bias was assessed using the methodological score of the Assessment of Quality in Lower Limb Arthroplasty tool. All phases of the review were performed by two reviewers independently. A random-effects model was applied to pool the migration data. FINDINGS: The literature search yielded 3,187 hits, of which ten studies were included, comprising 13 study groups and 381 UKAs. The majority of the early migration occurred in the first 6 months postoperatively followed by a period of very little migration, similar to what is reported for TKAs. The pooled mean migration expressed as the maximum total point motion of all UKAs at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years was 0.43 mm (95% CI 0.38-0.48), 0.54 mm (95% CI 0.40-0.67), 0.59 mm (95% CI 0.52-0.66), and 0.61 mm (95% CI 0.55-0.68), respectively. Migration at one year and two years was higher than migration of TKAs as reported in previous studies. All-polyethylene UKAs migrated more at one year (0.69 mm; 95% CI 0.58-0.80) than metal-backed UKAs (0.52 mm; 95% CI 0.46-0.58). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The migration pattern of UKAs is comparable with that of TKAs in the first two years as both types of implants show initial migration in the first few months and very little migration thereafter. However, UKAs had higher migration at 1-year and 2-year follow-up.

Integrity of the hip capsule measured with magnetic resonance imaging after capsular repair or unrepaired capsulotomy in hip arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Current literature shows no clear answer on the question how to manage the capsule after hip arthroscopy. Regarding patient reported outcome measures there seems to be no difference between capsular repair or unrepaired capsulotomy. AIM: To evaluate and compare the integrity of the hip capsule measured on a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan after capsular repair or unrepaired capsulotomy. METHODS: A case series study was performed; a random sample of patients included in a trial comparing capsular repair vs unrepaired capsulotomy had a postoperative MRI scan. The presence of a capsular defect and gap size were independently evaluated on MRI. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients (29 hips) were included. Patient demographics were comparable between treatment groups. There were 2 capsular defects in the capsular repair group and 7 capsular defects in the unrepaired capsulotomy group (P = 0.13). In the group of patients with a defect, median gap sizes at the acetabular side were 5.9 mm (range: 2.7-9.0) in the repaired and 8.0 mm (range: 4.5-18.0) in the unrepaired group (P = 0.462). At the muscular side gap sizes were 6.6 mm (range: 4.1-9.0) in the repaired group and 11.5 mm (range: 3.0-18.0) in the unrepaired group (P = 0.857). The calculated Odds ratio (OR) for having a capsular defect with an increasing lateral center-edge (CE) angle was 1.12 (P = 0.06). The OR for having a capsular defect is lower in the group of patients that underwent a labral repair with an OR of 0.1 (P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in capsular defects between capsular repair or unrepaired capsulotomy. Regarding clinical characteristics our case series shows that a larger CE angle increases the likelihood of a capsular defect and the presence of a labral repair decreases the likelihood of a capsular defect.

Decision aids can decrease decisional conflict in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: Randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The interest in shared decision making has increased considerably over the last couple of decades. Decision aids (DAs) can help in shared decision making. Especially when there is more than one reasonable option and outcomes between treatments are comparable. AIM: To investigate if the use of DAs decreases decisional conflict in patients when choosing treatment for knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this multi-center unblinded randomized controlled trial of patients with knee or hip OA were included from four secondary and tertiary referral centers. One-hundred-thirty-one patients who consulted an orthopedic surgeon for the first time with knee or hip OA were included between December 2014 and January 2016. After the first consultation, patients were randomly assigned by a computer to the control group which was treated according to standard care, or to the intervention group which was treated with standard care and provided with a DA. After the first consultation, patients were asked to complete questionnaires about decisional conflict (DCS), satisfaction, anxiety (PASS-20), gained knowledge, stage of decision making and preferred treatment. Follow-up was carried out after 26 wk and evaluated decisional conflict, satisfaction, anxiety, health outcomes (HOOS/KOOS), quality of life (EQ5D) and chosen treatment. RESULTS: After the first consultation, patients in the intervention group (mean DCS: 25 out of 100, SD: 13) had significantly (P value: 0.00) less decisional conflict compared to patients in the control group (mean DCS: 39 out of 100, SD 11). The mean satisfaction score for the given information (7.6 out of 10, SD: 1.8 vs 8.6 out of 10, SD: 1.1) (P value: 0.00), mean satisfaction score with the physician (8.3 out of 10, SD: 1.7 vs 8.9 out of 10, SD: 0.9) (P value: 0.01) and the mean knowledge score (3.3 out of 4, SD: 0.9 vs 3.7 out of, SD: 0.6) (P value: 0.01) were all significantly higher in the intervention group. At 26-wk follow-up, only 75 of 131 patients (57%) were available for analysis. This sample is too small for meaningful analysis. CONCLUSION: Providing patients with an additional DA may have a positive effect on decisional conflict after the first consultation. Due to loss to follow-up we are unsure if this effect remains over time.