Aims Revision rates for ankle arthroplasties are higher than hip or knee arthroplasties. When a total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) fails, it can either undergo revision to another ankle replacement, revision of the TAA to ankle arthrodesis (fusion), or amputation. Currently there is a paucity of literature on the outcomes of these revisions. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the outcomes of revision TAA with respect to surgery type, functional outcomes, and reoperations. Methods A systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Cochrane reviews were searched for relevant papers. Papers analyzing surgical treatment for failed ankle arthroplasties were included. All papers were reviewed by two authors. Overall, 34 papers met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed. Results Six papers analyzed all-cause reoperations of revision ankle arthroplasties, and 14 papers analyzed failures of conversion of a TAA to fusion. It was found that 26.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.4% to 40.1%) of revision ankle arthroplasties required further surgical intervention and 13.0% (95% CI 4.9% to 23.4%) of conversion to fusions; 14.4% (95% CI 8.4% to 21.4%) of revision ankle arthroplasties failed and 8% (95% CI 4% to 13%) of conversion to fusions failed. Conclusion Revision of primary TAA can be an effective procedure with improved functional outcomes, but has considerable risks of failure and reoperation, especially in those with periprosthetic joint infection. In those who undergo conversion of TAA to fusion, there are high rates of nonunion. Further comparative studies are required to compare both operative techniques. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):596–606.

No abstract

Introduction Historically, patients undergoing an elective hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasty regularly required blood transfusions. Improved surgical techniques and perioperative optimisation have significantly decreased the requirement for blood transfusions. Currently, our patients have two group and save samples taken: one six weeks preoperatively and one on admission. This study aims to determine whether a second group and save is required prior to primary elective hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasty. Methods All cases of elective arthroplasty from a single centre were retrospectively analysed over a 16-month period. Each case was reviewed to determine those who had a group and save at preassessment, group and save at the time of the operation and the timing and number of blood products transfused. Results A total of 711 elective arthroplasty procedures were completed with 48 patients requiring a transfusion during their admission. 9.9% of hip arthroplasty patients, 3.8% of knee arthroplasty patients and 4.9% of shoulder arthroplasty patients required a transfusion. The majority of the transfusions occurred at least 24 hours postoperatively with 0.84% of patients requiring an intraoperative transfusion. Discussion The vast majority of transfusions were delivered more than 24 hours following the procedure, demonstrating that routinely cross-matched blood products are superfluous to requirements. It is our suggestion that a formal group and save be completed only if the need for a blood transfusion is formally established, leading to a significant cost saving, a reduction in clinical work load and patients having to undergo fewer procedures.

No abstract

No abstract