Total joint replacement improves pain, functional quality of life, and health utilities in patients with late-stage knee and hip osteoarthritis for up to 5 years

Abstract

Objectives

To study and identify the determinants of the impact on pain, function, and quality of life of a prosthetic replacement surgery after 5 years of survival in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the lower limb.

Method

In total, 626 osteoarthritic patients from a University Hospital, divided in 2 groups (according to surgical site), were prospectively followed for 5 years after hip (n = 346) or knee (n = 280) replacement. Validated specific Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and generic (SF-36 and EQ) instruments assessing quality of life were used prior to surgery and yearly, thereafter. We defined a good outcome as a clinically relevant improvement in WOMAC greater than or equal to the minimally important difference (MID). Regressions showed the relationships among preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative measures and the evolution of WOMAC scores after 5 years (percent change). We also examined any predictors of good outcomes.

Results

The beneficial effect on quality of life observed during the first year after hip and knee arthroplasty (HA and KA) was maintained for up to 5 years. More than 3/4 of the patients in our study experienced a good outcome (86.04% in HA group and 79.91% in KA group). Both the good outcome and the 5-year change in WOMAC are predicted by preoperative (i.e., radiological severity, comorbidities, disability, and level of education), perioperative (i.e., length of hospital stay and place of discharge), and postoperative (i.e., complications) variables in the two groups.

Conclusions

Joint arthroplasty is a highly valuable therapeutic strategy for hip or knee OA patients who do not respond to pharmacological management. These results represent a step towards the collection of robust, scientifically sound data that will facilitate the completion of health economic analyses in the field of OA.

Key Points:
• This study reports the long term outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery in late-stage OA.
• We identified pre-, per-, and post-operative determinants which contribute to a greater improvement in pain and function, hence increasing patients’ satisfaction.
• These results could contribute to select an OA population which has a high probability to get an optimal benefit from total joint replacement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. 1.

    Nelson AE (2018) Osteoarthritis year in review 2017: clinical. Osteoarthr Cartil 26:319–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2017.11.014

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Liu CY, Li CD, Wang L, Ren S, Yu FB, Li JG, Ma JX, Ma XL (2018) Function scores of different surgeries in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and network-meta analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 97:e10828. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000010828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Cross M, Smith E, Hoy D, Nolte S, Ackerman I, Fransen M, Bridgett L, Williams S, Guillemin F, Hill CL, Laslett LL, Jones G, Cicuttini F, Osborne R, Vos T, Buchbinder R, Woolf A, March L (2014) The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis 73:1323–1330. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Bruyere O, Honvo G, Veronese N et al (2019) An updated algorithm recommendation for the management of knee osteoarthritis from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO). Semin Arthritis Rheum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semarthrit.2019.04.008

  5. 5.

    Zhang W, Doherty M, Arden N, Bannwarth B, Bijlsma J, Gunther KP, Hauselmann HJ, Herrero-Beaumont G, Jordan K, Kaklamanis P, Leeb B, Lequesne M, Lohmander S, Mazieres B, Martin-Mola E, Pavelka K, Pendleton A, Punzi L, Swoboda B, Varatojo R, Verbruggen G, Zimmermann-Gorska I, Dougados M, EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT) (2005) EULAR evidence based recommendations for the management of hip osteoarthritis: report of a task force of the EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT). Ann Rheum Dis 64:669–681. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2004.028886

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Jordan KM, Arden NK, Doherty M, Bannwarth B, Bijlsma JW, Dieppe P, Gunther K, Hauselmann H, Herrero-Beaumont G, Kaklamanis P, Lohmander S, Leeb B, Lequesne M, Mazieres B, Martin-Mola E, Pavelka K, Pendleton A, Punzi L, Serni U, Swoboda B, Verbruggen G, Zimmerman-Gorska I, Dougados M, Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials ESCISIT (2003) EULAR Recommendations 2003: an evidence based approach to the management of knee osteoarthritis: report of a Task Force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT). Ann Rheum Dis 62:1145–1155

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Hiligsmann M, Cooper C, Arden N, Boers M, Branco JC, Luisa Brandi M, Bruyère O, Guillemin F, Hochberg MC, Hunter DJ, Kanis JA, Kvien TK, Laslop A, Pelletier JP, Pinto D, Reiter-Niesert S, Rizzoli R, Rovati LC, Severens JL, Silverman S, Tsouderos Y, Tugwell P, Reginster JY (2013) Health economics in the field of osteoarthritis: an expert’s consensus paper from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO). Semin Arthritis Rheum 43:303–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semarthrit.2013.07.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    D’Ambrosi R, Marciandi L, Frediani PV, Facchini RM (2016) Uncemented total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 20 years. J Orthop Sci 21:500–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2016.03.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Sadoghi P, Liebensteiner M, Agreiter M, Leithner A, Bohler N, Labek G (2013) Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplast 28:1329–1332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.01.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Neuprez A, Neuprez AH, Kaux JF, Kurth W, Daniel C, Thirion T, Huskin JP, Gillet P, Bruyere O, Reginster JY (2018) Early clinically relevant improvement in quality of life and clinical outcomes 1 year postsurgery in patients with knee and hip joint arthroplasties. Cartilage 9:127–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1947603517743000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Neuprez A, Neuprez AH, Kurth W, Gillet P, Bruyere O, Reginster JY (2017) Profile of osteoarthritic patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty, a step toward a definition of the “need for surgery”. Aging Clin Exp Res 30:315–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0780-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Groll DL, To T, Bombardier C, Wright JG (2005) The development of a comorbidity index with physical function as the outcome. J Clin Epidemiol 58:595–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16:494–502

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT (1993) The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ 306:1440–1444

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Rabin R, de Charro F (2001) EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 33:337–343

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Losina E, Katz JN (2013) Total joint replacement outcomes in patients with concomitant comorbidities: a glass half empty or half full? Arthritis Rheum 65:1157–1159. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.37903

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Ramkumar PN, Navarro SM, Haeberle HS, Ng M, Piuzzi NS, Spindler KP (2018) No difference in outcomes 12 and 24 months after lower extremity total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplast 33:2322–2329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Shan L, Shan B, Graham D, Saxena A (2014) Total hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis on mid-term quality of life. Osteoarthr Cartil 22:389–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2013.12.006

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Shan L, Shan B, Suzuki A, Nouh F, Saxena A (2015) Intermediate and long-term quality of life after total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:156–168. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.00372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Konopka JF, Lee YY, Su EP, McLawhorn AS (2018) Quality-adjusted life years after hip and knee arthroplasty: health-related quality of life after 12,782 joint replacements. JB JS Open Access 3:e0007. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.18.00007

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Crawford CH, Glassman SD, Mummaneni PV, Knightly JJ, Asher AL (2016) Back pain improvement after decompression without fusion or stabilization in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and clinically significant preoperative back pain. J Neurosurg Spine 25:596–601. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.3.SPINE151468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Hawker GA, Badley EM, Borkhoff CM, Croxford R, Davis AM, Dunn S, Gignac MA, Jaglal SB, Kreder HJ, Sale JE (2013) Which patients are most likely to benefit from total joint arthroplasty? Arthritis Rheum 65:1243–1252. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.37901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Frankel L, Sanmartin C, Conner-Spady B, Marshall DA, Freeman-Collins L, Wall A, Hawker GA (2012) Osteoarthritis patients’ perceptions of “appropriateness” for total joint replacement surgery. Osteoarthr Cartil 20:967–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2012.05.008

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Beswick AD, Wylde V, Gooberman-Hill R, Blom A, Dieppe P (2012) What proportion of patients report long-term pain after total hip or knee replacement for osteoarthritis? A systematic review of prospective studies in unselected patients. BMJ Open 2:e000435. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000435

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Hofstede SN, Gademan MG, Vliet Vlieland TP, Nelissen RG, Marang-van de Mheen PJ (2016) Preoperative predictors for outcomes after total hip replacement in patients with osteoarthritis: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17:212. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1070-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Tilbury C, Holtslag MJ, Tordoir RL, Leichtenberg CS, Verdegaal SH, Kroon HM, Fiocco M, Nelissen RG, Vlieland TPV (2016) Outcome of total hip arthroplasty, but not of total knee arthroplasty, is related to the preoperative radiographic severity of osteoarthritis. A prospective cohort study of 573 patients. Acta Orthop 87:67–71. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1092369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Schnurr C, Jarrous M, Gudden I, Eysel P, Konig DP (2013) Pre-operative arthritis severity as a predictor for total knee arthroplasty patients’ satisfaction. Int Orthop 37:1257–1261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-1862-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Schilling CG, Dowsey MM, Petrie DJ, Clarke PM, Choong PF (2017) Predicting the long-term gains in health-related quality of life after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 32:395–401.e392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.07.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Peter WF, Dekker J, Tilbury C, Tordoir RL, Verdegaal SH, Onstenk R, Bénard MR, Vehmeijer SB, Fiocco M, Vermeulen HM, van der Linden-van der Zwaag H, Nelissen RG, Vliet Vlieland TP (2015) The association between comorbidities and pain, physical function and quality of life following hip and knee arthroplasty. Rheumatol Int 35:1233–1241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-015-3211-7

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Lalmohamed A, Vestergaard P, de Boer A, Leufkens HG, van Staa TP, de Vries F (2014) Changes in mortality patterns following total hip or knee arthroplasty over the past two decades: a nationwide cohort study. Arthritis Rheum 66:311–318. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.38232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Frie KG, van der Meulen J, Black N (2012) Relationship between patients’ reports of complications and symptoms, disability and quality of life after surgery. Br J Surg 99:1156–1163. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Shadyab AH, Li W, Eaton CB, LaCroix AZ (2018) General and abdominal obesity as risk factors for late-life mobility limitation after total knee or hip replacement for osteoarthritis among women. Arthritis Care Res 70:1030–1038. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.23438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Dowsey MM, Spelman T, Choong PF (2016) Development of a prognostic nomogram for predicting the probability of nonresponse to total knee arthroplasty 1 year after surgery. J Arthroplast 31:1654–1660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    WHOQOL Group (1993) Study protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a quality of life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). Qual Life Res 2:153–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Unverzagt S, Prondzinsky R, Peinemann F (2013) Single-center trials tend to provide larger treatment effects than multicenter trials: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 66:1271–1280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.05.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Wright RW, Brand RA, Dunn W, Spindler KP (2007) How to write a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 455:23–29. https://doi.org/10.1097/BLO.0b013e31802c9098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Imam MA, Barke S, Stafford GH, Parkin D, Field RE (2014) Loss to follow-up after total hip replacement: a source of bias in patient reported outcome measures and registry datasets? Hip Int 24:465–472. https://doi.org/10.5301/hipint.5000141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Rocheleau CM, Romitti PA, Sherlock SH, Sanderson WT, Bell EM, Druschel C (2012) Effect of survey instrument on participation in a follow-up study: a randomization study of a mailed questionnaire versus a computer-assisted telephone interview. BMC Public Health 12:579. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-579

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Schwartz CE, Andresen EM, Nosek MA, Krahn GL, RRTC Expert Panel on Health Status Measurement (2007) Response shift theory: important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 88:529–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2006.12.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AN participated in the design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data, and manuscript preparation.

AHN participated in the analysis of the data and revising of the manuscript.

WK, CD, TT, JPH, JFK, and PG participated in the design of the study and revising of the manuscript.

OB and JYR participated in the design of the study, interpretation of the data, and manuscript preparation.

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Audrey Neuprez MD, MPH.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

None

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the University Hospital of Liege Ethics Committee (approval number B70720084766).

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neuprez, A., Neuprez, A.H., Kaux, JF. et al. Total joint replacement improves pain, functional quality of life, and health utilities in patients with late-stage knee and hip osteoarthritis for up to 5 years. Clin Rheumatol 39, 861–871 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-019-04811-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Arthroplasty
  • Hip
  • Knee
  • Osteoarthritis
  • Quality of life