Cohort study finds learning curves affect revision risk in total knee arthroplasty implants, suggesting caution during transition periods.
Prior studies have reported learning curves as surgeons adopt new technology/techniques. The authors sought to evaluate revision risk following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to assess whether a learning curve was observed as surgeons transitioned to 1) a new implant from the same manufacturer and 2) a new implant from a new manufacturer. Patients ≥ 18 years of age who underwent primary fixed bearing, posterior stabilized, fully cemented TKA with patella resurfacing were identified using a US integrated health care system's total joint replacement registry (2009-2023). The exposure groups were categorized in these groups: baseline implant (reference), first 50 TKA with new implant (≤ 50), second 50 (51-100), third 50 (101-150), and the remainder (> 150). A multiple Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate revision risk with adjustment for confounders. The intra-manufacturer cohort comprised 42,743 TKA. A higher revision risk was observed for the ≤ 50 group compared to the baseline group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.86); no other differences were observed after the first 50 TKA (51-100: HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.71-1.34; 101-150: HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69-1.32; > 150: HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.79-1.34). However, the association was no longer significant after excluding the TKA performed with the Attune fixed bearing tray, which has been associated with a higher risk of revision in the total joint replacement registry. The inter-manufacturer cohort comprised 19,817 TKA. No differences were observed when comparing a new manufacturer to the baseline manufacturer. Surgeons should be cautious for the first several TKA when transitioning to a new implant given the relationship between surgeon and implant on revision risk. Level III.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leta et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: