Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Profile of osteoarthritic patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty, a step toward a definition of the “need for surgery”

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aims

The objective of this study is to characterize, based on clinical, radiographic, health-related, quality-of-life-related, and demographic variables, the profile of a large, homogeneous, cohort of patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty, in a public hospital. Current regulatory guidelines for structure-modifying agent are not clear regarding hard clinical endpoint. The “need for surgery” has been suggested as a potential relevant outcome, but, until now, it is poorly defined. By characterizing a large number of patients who undergo total hip or total knee replacement, this paper aims at providing a contribution to the better definition of the “need for surgery” in advanced OA of the lower limbs.

Methods

Consecutive patients who underwent primary knee arthroplasty (KA) or hip arthroplasty (HA) between December 2008 and February 2013, in an academic hospital, and who were diagnosed with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) (ACR criteria). Data collected at baseline included demographic and clinical data; Kellgren–Lawrence radiological grading; Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC); EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire and EuroQol visual analog scale; and 36-item Short Form Health Survey.

Results

626 subjects were included, 346 with hip OA and 280 with knee OA. Significant differences between subjects in need of an HA or of a KA were seen in terms of age (66.5 years versus 65 for hip), duration of complaints (2188 days versus 1146.5 for hip), BMI (28.68 kg/m² versus 27.07), radiological status (severe OA were found in 79.85% in knee group and 68.73% in hip group), comorbidities (FCI higher in knee group), traumatic of surgical history (37 versus 6%), and health-related quality of life and function (patients with HA had a poorer clinical status regarding WOMAC and WOMAC subscale).

Conclusion

Significant differences were observed between patients undergoing KA or HA. These differences might be useful to better understand the “need for surgery” status in these indications. This concept may help to define responders and failures to pharmacological treatment of OA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Glyn-Jones S et al (2015) Osteoarthritis. Lancet 386:376–387

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pereira D et al (2011) The effect of osteoarthritis definition on prevalence and incidence estimates: a systematic review. Osteoarthr Cartil 19:1270–1285

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Litwic A et al (2013) Epidemiology and burden of osteoarthritis. Br Med Bull 105:185–199

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Deshpande BR et al (2016) The number of persons with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in the United States: impact of race/ethnicity, age, sex, and obesity. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 68:1743–1750

  5. Cross M et al (2014) The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis 73:1323–1330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hiligsmann M et al (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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hunter DJ (2011) Osteoarthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 25:801–814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Reginster JY et al (2015) Recommendations for an update of the 2010 European regulatory guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products used in the treatment of osteoarthritis and reflections about related clinically relevant outcomes: expert consensus statement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 23:2086–2093

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bruyere O et al (2014) An algorithm recommendation for the management of knee osteoarthritis in Europe and internationally: a report from a task force of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO). Semin Arthritis Rheum 44:253–263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bruyere O et al (2016) A consensus statement on the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) algorithm for the management of knee osteoarthritis-From evidence-based medicine to the real-life setting. Semin Arthritis Rheum 45:S3–S11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Carr AJ et al (2012) Knee replacement. Lancet 379:1331–1340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pivec R et al (2012) Hip arthroplasty. Lancet 380:1768–1777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. OECD (2015) Hip and knee replacement, in Health at a Glance 2015: OECD Indicators. OECD publishing, Paris, pp 112–113

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cutolo M et al (2015) Commentary on recent therapeutic guidelines for osteoarthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 44:611–617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Altman RD et al (2005) Total joint replacement of hip or knee as an outcome measure for structure modifying trials in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 13:13–19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Abadie E et al (2004) Recommendations for the use of new methods to assess the efficacy of disease-modifying drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 12:263–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Groll DL et al (2005) The development of a comorbidity index with physical function as the outcome. J Clin Epidemiol 58:595–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bellamy N et al (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 

  19. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SK (1994) SF-36 physical and mental health summary scale: a user’s manual. The health institute ed, Boston

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Bijlsma JW, Berenbaum F, Lafeber FP (2011) Osteoarthritis: an update with relevance for clinical practice. Lancet 377:2115–2126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Silverwood V et al (2015) Current evidence on risk factors for knee osteoarthritis in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoarthr Cartil 23:507–515

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Srikanth VK et al (2005) A meta-analysis of sex differences prevalence, incidence and severity of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 13:769–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kulkarni K et al (2016) Obesity and osteoarthritis. Maturitas 89:22–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gelber AC et al (1999) Body mass index in young men and the risk of subsequent knee and hip osteoarthritis. Am J Med 107:542–548

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sokolove J, Lepus CM (2013) Role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis: latest findings and interpretations. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis 5:77–94

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Azamar-Llamas D et al (2017) Adipokine contribution to the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis. Mediat Inflamm 2017:5468023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Veronese N et al (2016) Adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with lower prevalence of osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Clin Nutr. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2016.09.035

  30. Bjorgul K, Novicoff WM, Saleh KJ (2010) Evaluating comorbidities in total hip and knee arthroplasty: available instruments. J Orthop Traumatol 11:203–209

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Peter WF et al (2015) The association between comorbidities and pain, physical function and quality of life following hip and knee arthroplasty. Rheumatol Int 35:1233–1241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Jones CA, Pohar S (2012) Health-related quality of life after total joint arthroplasty: a scoping review. Clin Geriatr Med 28:395–429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jenkins PJ et al (2013) Predicting the cost-effectiveness of total hip and knee replacement: a health economic analysis. Bone Jt J 95-B:115–121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Mont MA et al (2014) Long-term implant survivorship of cementless total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. J Knee Surg 27:369–376

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sadoghi P et al (2013) Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty 28:1329–1332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ethgen O et al (2004) Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Jt Surg Am 86-A:963–974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jain NB et al (2005) Comorbidities increase complication rates in patients having arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435:232–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Richmond SA et al (2013) Are joint injury, sport activity, physical activity, obesity, or occupational activities predictors for osteoarthritis? A systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 43:515–519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dowsey MM et al (2012) The association between radiographic severity and pre-operative function in patients undergoing primary knee replacement for osteoarthritis. Knee 19:860–865

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Keurentjes JC et al (2013) Patients with severe radiographic osteoarthritis have a better prognosis in physical functioning after hip and knee replacement: a cohort-study. PLoS One 8:e59500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Tilbury C et al (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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Valdes AM et al (2012) Inverse relationship between preoperative radiographic severity and postoperative pain in patients with osteoarthritis who have undergone total joint arthroplasty. Semin Arthritis Rheum 41:568–575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bruyere O et al (2002) Radiologic features poorly predict clinical outcomes in knee osteoarthritis. Scand J Rheumatol 31:13–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. McHugh GA et al (2008) Patients waiting for a hip or knee joint replacement: is there any prioritization for surgery? J Eval Clin Pract 14:361–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Shao Y et al (2013) The fate of the remaining knee(s) or hip(s) in osteoarthritic patients undergoing a primary TKA or THA. J Arthroplasty 28:1842–1845

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sanders TL et al (2017) Subsequent total joint arthroplasty after primary total knee or hip arthroplasty: a 40-year population-based study. J Bone Jt Surg Am 99:396–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Chang A et al (2010) Frequency of varus and valgus thrust and factors associated with thrust presence in persons with or at higher risk of developing knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 62:1403–1411

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, CHU Sart-Tilman, Bât B23, 4000, Liège, Belgium

    Audrey Neuprez, Arnaud H. Neuprez, Olivier Bruyère & Jean-Yves Reginster

  2. Orthopaedic Surgery Department, University Hospital of Liège, Sart-Tilman, 4000, Liège, Belgium

    Audrey Neuprez, William Kurth & Philippe Gillet

  3. Rehabilitation and Sports Traumatology Department, University Hospital of Liège, Liège, Belgium

    Audrey Neuprez

Authors
  1. Audrey Neuprez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arnaud H. Neuprez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. William Kurth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philippe Gillet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Olivier Bruyère
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jean-Yves Reginster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Audrey Neuprez.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The local ethics committee approved this trial.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 108 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neuprez, A., Neuprez, A.H., Kurth, W. et al. 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 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0780-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0780-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation