Abstract
The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize studies published since the last systematic review in 2015 that compare outcomes of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in older patients (≥ 80 years) and in younger patients (< 80 years), in terms of complication rates and mortality.
An electronic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane Register. Studies were included if they compared outcomes of primary TKA for osteoarthritis in patients aged 80 years and over to patients aged under 80 years, in terms of complication rates, mortality, or patient-reported outcomes (PROs).
Thirteen studies were eligible. Surgical complications in older patients ranged from 0.6–21.1%, while in younger patients they ranged from 0.3–14.6%. Wound complications in older patients ranged from 0.5–20%, while in younger patients they ranged from 0.8–22.0%. Medical complications (cardiac, respiratory, thromboembolic) in older patients ranged from 0.4–17.3%, while in younger patients they ranged from 0.2–11.5%.
Mortality within 90 days in older patients ranged between 0–2%, while in younger patients it ranged between 0.0–0.03%.
Compared to younger patients, older patients have higher rates of surgical and medical complications, as well as higher mortality following TKA. The literature also reports greater length of stay for older patients, but inconsistent findings regarding PROs. The present findings provide surgeons and older patients with clearer updated evidence, to make informed decisions regarding TKA, considering the risks and benefits within this age group. Patients aged over 80 years should therefore not be excluded from consideration for primary TKA based on age alone.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1052-1062. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Introduction
The elderly population continues to grow globally,1 increasing the overall prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA).2 It is estimated that 17.7% of this population suffer from end-stage OA of the knee,3 resulting in a rising demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), which is forecast to increase exponentially for this group of patients up to 2050.4
The success of TKA for patients aged over 80 years is a matter of controversy, as prior studies have reported inconsistent associations between advanced age and outcomes. Whereas some studies found patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following TKA in older patients to be comparable to those in their younger counterparts,5–7 others reported them to be significantly inferior in elderly patients.8,9 Furthermore, some studies reported higher complication rates, length of stay (LoS) in hospital, and mortality following TKA in older patients,6,10–12 whilst other studies argued that these outcomes depend more on morbidities and health status, rather than age per se.13–15 Moreover, McCalden et al8 reported lower revision rates for TKA at five and 10 years for patients aged over 80 years, compared to younger patients.
In 2018, Murphy et al16 published a systematic review on the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty and TKA, and found higher risks of complications and mortality in older patients. In 2016, Kuperman et al17 published a meta-analysis of comparative studies performed over the two preceding decades and concluded that primary TKA had comparable risks and similar improvements in outcomes in both older and younger populations. In both the systematic review and the meta-analysis, much of the available data was deemed to be of poor quality, and some of the included studies are outdated in terms of implant design, surgical techniques and postoperative management. Both surgeons and patients would benefit from clearer, updated evidence to make informed decisions regarding surgical intervention in end-stage OA of the knee. The purpose of the present systematic review was to synthesize studies published since 2015 that compare outcomes of primary TKA in older patients (≥ 80 years) and in younger patients (< 80 years) in terms of complication rates and mortality. The hypothesis was that older patients receiving TKA would have similar outcomes to younger patients.
Material and methods
The protocol for this systematic review was submitted to PROSPERO prior to commencement (registration number: CRD42020201381) and conforms to the principles outlined in the handbook of the Cochrane Collaboration,18 along with the guidelines established by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA).19
Search strategy
The authors conducted a structured electronic literature search using the PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, applying the keywords and medical subject heading (MeSH) terms presented in Appendix 1. The search was limited to articles published between 1 January 2015 and 3 August 2020, to ensure a contemporary systematic review in consideration of modernization of surgical techniques, implant design, and postoperative management strategy. After removal of duplicate records, two researchers (LS & FVR) each screened the titles and abstracts to determine the suitability for the review against predefined eligibility criteria:
Inclusion criteria
- Studies comparing patients aged 80 years and over to patients aged under 80 years, who received primary TKA for OA, and reporting one or more of the following outcomes: length of hospital stay, mortality, complication rates, or revision rates.
Exclusion criteria
- Narrative or systematic reviews, non-comparative case series, case reports, expert opinions, editorials or letters to editors.
- Studies published in languages other than English.
- Studies that reported aggregate outcomes of hip and knee arthroplasty, for which authors were contacted to obtain data specific to TKA, and for which no response was received after two reminders.
Study selection
Full-text review of studies meeting the criteria in the initial screening was carried out by two researchers (LS & FVR) and any disagreement about the final eligibility of studies was first discussed between the researchers, and, where required, a third researcher (JHM) resolved any disagreement. The reference lists of studies for full-text review were searched, and an expert in TKA (OC) was consulted to further establish relevant studies not captured by the database searches.
Data extraction and quality assessment
Data extraction was performed by two researchers (LS & FVR) independently and their results compared to ensure accuracy. Where there was disagreement in the documented value, the true value was ascertained by simultaneous review of the data in question by both researchers. The following data were extracted from the included studies: author(s), journal, year of publication, level of evidence, country in which the study was performed, conflicts of interest and funding declaration. Patient characteristics of the over 80 and under 80 populations were retrieved, including number of patients in each group, sex, age, body mass index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) grade. Type and incidence of complications, mortality, LoS, and pre- and postoperative PROs were extracted where available. Methodological quality of the eligible studies was assessed by two researchers (LS & FVR) according to the Downs and Black Quality Checklist for Health Care Intervention Studies,20 to appraise the reporting quality (10 items), external validity (three items), bias (seven items), confounding and selection bias (six items), and power (one item) of each study. Using modified scoring for power (1 – power calculated/recorded in study, 0 – power not calculated/reported) each study was given an overall score out of 28, and the quality of a study was rated as excellent (≥ 26); good (20–25); fair (15–19); or poor (≤ 14).21 Where there was disagreement between the researchers, consensus was achieved by discussion and review.
Statistical analysis
Heterogeneity was evaluated by visual inspection of the forest plots and quantified using the I2 statistic to provide a measure of the degree of inconsistency across the studies.22 Where possible, summary pooled estimates of proportions with 95% confidence intervals were calculated via logit transformation using inverse-variance weighting within a random effects model framework. Where the domains of studies were not sufficiently comparable to pool, results were displayed in a forest plot and the summary estimate withheld.23 Statistical analyses were performed using R version 3.5.0 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) using the meta package.
Results
The systematic search returned 1421 records, of which 27 were duplicates, leaving 1394 for screening. A total of 1366 studies were excluded by examining their titles and/or abstracts, and a further 18 studies9,12,24–39 were excluded after full-text review. A search of the reference lists of the 10 eligible studies, and a discussion with an expert on TKA, identified three additional studies. This left 13 studies7,15,40–50 eligible for this systematic review, all of which were cohort or case-control studies (Table 1, Fig. 1). Due to substantial heterogeneity and insufficient information to further investigate this heterogeneity, pooling of results was not performed and only non-statistical syntheses was provided.
Study characteristics studies comparing patients aged > 80 and < 80 years following primary TKA
| Author and year | Groups | Patients | Female sex | Age mean [median] | BMI | ASA grade I | ASA grade II | ASA grade III | ASA grade IV | Location | COI declared | Funding declared |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andreozzi et al 2020 | >80 years | 103 | 68% | 83 | 16% | 45% | 39% | Italy | Yes | Yes | ||
| <80 years | 103 | 68% | 64.6 | 43% | 52% | 5% | ||||||
| Austin et al 201845 | >80 years | 175 | 56% | >80 | United States | Yes | Yes | |||||
| <80 years | 2133 | 58% | <80 | |||||||||
| Bovonratwet et al 201946 | >80 years | 1005 | 53% | 82.8 | 28.5 | ASA 1 + 2: 44% | 51% | 2% | United States | Yes | Yes | |
| <80 years | 17191 | 51% | 64 | 32.2 | ASA 1 + 2: 59% | 40% | 1% | |||||
| Cher et al 201844 | >80 years | 209 | 82.1 | 26.4 | Singapore | Yes | Yes | |||||
| <80 years | 209 | 66.1 | 26.6 | |||||||||
| Goh et al 202050 | >80 years | 594 | 80% | 81.5 | 26.4 | Singapore | Yes | Yes | ||||
| <80 years | 594 | 80% | 69.7 | 26.3 | ||||||||
| Klasan et al 201949 | >80 years | 644 | 64% | 83.3 | 3% | 49% | 47% | 0% | Australia | Yes | ||
| <80 years | 644 | 64% | 69.9 | 3% | 49% | 47% | 0% | |||||
| Kodaira et al 201948 | >80 years | 679 | 77% | 82 | 25.1 | Japan | Yes | Yes | ||||
| <80 years | 673 | 81% | 71 | 27.0 | ||||||||
| Maempel et al 201540 | >80 years | 358 | [83] | Scotland | Yes | |||||||
| 75–80 years | 694 | [77] | ||||||||||
| <75 years | 2092 | [66] | ||||||||||
| Murphy et al 201847 | >80 years | 292 | 62% | 83 | 30.4 | 1% | 45% | 52% | 1% | Australia | Yes | Yes |
| <80 years | 2062 | 67% | 67.8 | 33.7 | 3% | 54% | 42% | 1% | ||||
| Sezgin et al 20197 | >80 years | 22 | 92 | Sweden | ||||||||
| <80 years | 1035 | 65-74 | ||||||||||
| Skinner et al 201641 | >80 years | 31 | 61% | 91 | 27.2 | England | ||||||
| <80 years | 36 | 36% | 74.56 | 26.1 | ||||||||
| Townsend et al 201842 | >79 years | 24 | 54% | >79 | 29.0 | United States | Yes | |||||
| 70–79 years | 94 | 62% | 70–79 | 31.6 | ||||||||
| 60–69 years | 138 | 69% | 60–69 | 34.6 | ||||||||
| 50–59 years | 68 | 72% | 50–59 | 35.7 | ||||||||
| <50 years | 32 | 72% | <50 | 35.9 | ||||||||
| Yun et al 201843 | >80 years | 38 | 84% | 82.8 | 25.6 | 0% | 61% | 34% | 5% | Republic of Korea | Yes | |
| <80 years | 41 | 92% | 67.9 | 25.8 | 0% | 61% | 39% | 0% |
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty; ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; BMI, body mass index; COI, conflict of interest.
Flowchart.
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty; THA, total hip arthroplasty.
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Flowchart.
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty; THA, total hip arthroplasty.
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Flowchart.
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty; THA, total hip arthroplasty.
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Surgical complications
Seven studies reported rates of surgical, and/or wound complications (Table 2).15,40,43,45,47–49 The rate of surgical complications in older patients (≥ 80 years) ranged from 0.6–21.1%, while in younger patients (< 80 years) it ranged from 0.3–14.6%, with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) (Fig. 2). Wound complications in older patients ranged from 0.5–20%, while in younger patients they ranged from 0.8–22.0%, with no heterogeneity (I2 = 1%).
Complications in patients aged > 80 and < 80 years following primary TKA
| Author | Groups | Surgical complications | Wound complications | Cardiac | Medical complications | Confusion/delirium | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Respiratory | Thromboembolic | ||||||
| Andreozzi et al 202015 | >80 years | 10.00% | 4.00% | 6.00% | 12.00% | ||
| <80 years | 8.00% | 2.00% | 3.00% | 5.00% | |||
| Austin et al 201845 | >80 years | ||||||
| <80 years | |||||||
| Bovontarwet et al 201946 | >80 years | 0.50% | 1.44% | 0.40% | 1.29% | ||
| <80 years | 0.78% | 0.96% | 0.20% | 0.56% | |||
| Klasan et al 201949 | >80 years | 2.44% | 2.00% | ||||
| <80 years | 2.27% | 2.00% | |||||
| Kodaira et al 201948 | >80 years | 0.60% | 2.20% | 11.70% | |||
| <80 years | 0.30% | 2.20% | 1.60% | ||||
| Maempel et al 201540 | >80 years | 1.70% | 3.10% | 1.60% | 0.90% | 3.10% | |
| 75–80 years | 2.00% | 1.60% | 2.30% | 0.60% | 2.20% | ||
| <75 years | 1.10% | 1.40% | 0.90% | 1.00% | 0.60% | ||
| Murphy et al 201847 | >80 years | 20.00% | 17.30% | 3.30% | 13.10% | 11.10% | |
| <80 years | 22.00% | 11.50% | 1.90% | 9.40% | 2.60% | ||
| Yun et al 201843 | >80 years | 21.10% | 10.50% | ||||
| <80 years | 14.60% | 4.90% | |||||
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty.
Forest plot of the risk difference (RD) of surgical complications in patients aged > 80 years and < 80 years (a RD of 0.02 corresponds to a 2% higher risk for patients aged > 80).
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Forest plot of the risk difference (RD) of surgical complications in patients aged > 80 years and < 80 years (a RD of 0.02 corresponds to a 2% higher risk for patients aged > 80).
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Forest plot of the risk difference (RD) of surgical complications in patients aged > 80 years and < 80 years (a RD of 0.02 corresponds to a 2% higher risk for patients aged > 80).
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Medical complications
Seven studies reported rates of medical (cardiac, respiratory, or thromboembolic) complications (Table 2).15,40,43,45,47–49 Medical complications in older patients ranged from 0.4–17.3%, while in younger patients they ranged from 0.2–11.5%, with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 20 to 70%) (Fig. 3). Five studies reported on confusion or delirium, which in older patients ranged from 3.1–12.0%, while in younger patients ranged from 0.6–5.0%, with considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 89%).15,40,43,47,49 The overall risk of medical complications is 2% lower in younger patients.
Forest plot of the risk difference (RD) of medical complications in patients aged > 80 years and < 80 years (a RD of 0.02 corresponds to a 2% higher risk for patients aged > 80).
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Forest plot of the risk difference (RD) of medical complications in patients aged > 80 years and < 80 years (a RD of 0.02 corresponds to a 2% higher risk for patients aged > 80).
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Forest plot of the risk difference (RD) of medical complications in patients aged > 80 years and < 80 years (a RD of 0.02 corresponds to a 2% higher risk for patients aged > 80).
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 6, 11; 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
Mortality
Six studies reported on mortality following primary TKA with rates varying across follow-ups (Table 3).40,41,43,46,47,49 Mortality within 90 days in older patients ranged between 0–2%, while in younger patients it ranged between 0–0.03%.15,43,46 Mortality within two years in older patients ranged between 3.2–12.9%, while in younger patients it ranged between 0–1.5%.40,41 Mortality within 10 years in older patients ranged between 28–32%, while in younger patients it ranged between 7–12%.47,49
Mortality in patients aged > 80 and < 80 years following primary TKA
| Author and date | Groups | Time | Mortality | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andreozzi et al 202015 | >80 years | Within 90 days | 2.00% | |
| <80 years | 0.00% | |||
| Bovonratwet et al 201946 | >80 years | Within 90 days | 0.20% | 0.108 |
| <80 years | 0.03% | |||
| Klasan et al 201949 | >80 years | Within 10 years | 32.00% | <0.001 |
| <80 years | 12.00% | |||
| Maempel et al 201540 | >80 years | Within 1 year | 3.20% | |
| 75–80 years | 2.00% | |||
| <75 years | 1.50% | |||
| Murphy et al 201847 | >80 years | Within 10 years | 28.00% | |
| <80 years | 7.00% | |||
| Skinner et al 201641 | >80 years | Within 2 years | 12.90% | |
| <80 years | 0.00% | |||
| Yun et al 201843 | >80 years | Within 90 days | 0.00% | |
| <80 years | 0.00% |
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty.
Length of stay in hospital
Eight studies reported LoS following primary TKA, all of which found a greater LoS for older patients (Table 4).7,15,41–43,45,47,48 The mean LoS for older patients ranged from 2–20.9 days, while for younger patients it ranged from 1.5–14.4 days.
Length of stay (LoS) in patients aged > 80 and < 80 years following primary TKA
| Author | Groups | LoS (days) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andreozzi et al 202015 | >80 years | 5.8 | <0.001 |
| <80 years | 4.1 | ||
| Austin et al 201845 | >80 years | 3.3 | |
| <80 years | 2.9 | ||
| Kodaira et al 201948 | >80 years | 18.8 | |
| <80 years | 16.8 | ||
| Murphy et al 201847 | >80 years | [5] | |
| <80 years | [4] | ||
| Sezgin et al 20197 | >80 years | 6.2 | |
| <80 years | 4.1 | ||
| Skinner et al 201641 | >80 years | 8.4 | 0.001 |
| <80 years | 5.6 | ||
| Townsend et al 201842 | >79 years | 2.0 | 0.318 |
| 70–79 years | 1.7 | ||
| 60–69 years | 1.5 | ||
| 50–59 years | 1.9 | ||
| <50 years | 1.6 | ||
| Yun et al 201843 | >80 years | 20.9 | <0.001 |
| <80 years | 14.4 |
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty.
Patient-reported outcomes
Twelve studies assessed one or more PROs following primary TKA (Table 5). Six studies reported on Oxford Knee Score (OKS), four of which found ‘no difference’ between age groups,15,41,42,44 while two found worse scores for older patients,49,50 none of which exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 5.0 points.51 Five studies reported on Knee Society Score (KSS), four of which reported ‘no difference’ between age groups,15,43,44,50 while one reported better scores for older patients,40 which did not exceed the MCID of 7.2 points.52 Four studies reported on the function subcomponent of the KSS, two of which found ‘no difference’ between age groups,15,44 while two found worse scores for older patients.40,50 Two studies reported on Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, one of which found ‘no difference’ between age groups,42 while the other found better scores for older patients,43 which did not exceed the MCID of 10.8 points.53
Clinical outcomes comparing patients aged > 80 and < 80 years following primary TKA
| Author | Patient-reported outcome | >80 | Comparator | p-value | Patient-reported outcomecomparison | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | ±SD | Mean(range*) | ±SD | ||||
| Andreozzi et al 202015 | OKS | 40 | 2.6 | 41 | 2.7 | No difference | |
| KSS | 81.5 | 9.6 | 83.3 | 6.8 | No difference | ||
| KSFS | 77.6 | 7.6 | 83.2 | 8.8 | 0.122 | No difference | |
| Austin et al 201845 | PCS | Not reported | Not reported | No difference | |||
| Cher et al 201844 | OKS | 22.85 | 19.98 | No difference | |||
| KSS | 84.4 | 86.2 | No difference | ||||
| KSFS | 55.77 | 73.44 | No difference | ||||
| SF-36 | 49.59 | 46.41 | <0.05 | Better for >80 | |||
| Goh et al 202050 | OKS | 39.2 | 6.7 | 41.5 | 5.2 | <0.001 | Worse for >80 |
| KSS | 83.1 | 12.3 | 82.2 | 11.9 | No difference | ||
| KSFS | 57.7 | 19.6 | 69.8 | 19 | <0.001 | Worse for >80 | |
| SF-36 PCS | 45.2 | 11.1 | 48.1 | 10 | 0.001 | Worse for >80 | |
| SF-36 MCS | 55 | 10.2 | 55.5 | 10.2 | No difference | ||
| Klasan et al 201949 | OKS | 38.9 | 41 | <0.001 | Worse for >80 | ||
| Kodaira et al 201948 | JOA | 82.8 | 0.4 | 87.4 | 0.3 | No difference | |
| Maempel et al 201540 | AKSK | 93a | (92–93)a | 0.001 | Better for >80 | ||
| AKSF | 65 | 80–80 | <0.001 | Worse for >80 | |||
| Murphy et al 201847 | SF-12 PCS | No difference | |||||
| Sezgin et al 20197 | KOOS | 0.005 (symptoms) | Better for >80 | ||||
| (KOOS symptoms) | |||||||
| EQ-VAS | 76 | 78 | 0.700 | No difference | |||
| Skinner et al 201641 | OKS | n.s. | No difference | ||||
| Townsend et al 201842 | WOMAC | 63.5 | (53.0–64.4) | No difference | |||
| OKS | 26.5 | (23.0–27.8) | No difference | ||||
| Yun et al 201843 | WOMAC | 28.7 | 21.7 | 0.009 | Worse for >80 | ||
| KSS | 68.34 | 64.83 | 0.130 | No difference | |||
| SF-36 | 51.3 | 59.5 | 0.022 | Worse for >80 | |||
Note. TKA, total knee arthroplasty; OKS, Oxford Knee Score; KSS, Knee Society Score; KSFS, Knee Society Score (Function); KOOS, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; JOA, Japanese Orthopaedic Association;
AKSK, American Knee Society Score (Knee); AKSF, American Knee Society Score (Function); PCS, Physical Component Socre; MCS, Mental Component Score; EQ-VAS, EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale; SF-36, Short Form 36; WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.
*The range is reported in case of multiple comparator groups.
Median values.
Quality assessment
The overall level of quality was defined as good in two studies (15%), fair in 10 (77%), and poor in one (8%) (Table 6). Reporting quality was excellent (≥ 9) in seven studies (54%), and good (7–8) in six (46%). External validity was poor in seven studies (54%) suggesting that their findings may not broadly apply to the general population of patients undergoing TKA, and internal validity was good in all studies (100%), indicating these studies were methodologically appropriate. Power analyses were only performed in five studies (38%).
Assessment of methodological quality of clinical studies using an modified version of the checklist by Downs and Black
| Author and year | Evaluated domain | Total (/28) | Total (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal validity | |||||||
| Reporting | External validity | Study bias | Selection bias | Power | |||
| (/11) | (/3) | (/7) | (/6) | (/1) | |||
| Andreozzi et al 202015 | 10 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 19 | 68% |
| Austin et al 201845 | 11 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 21 | 75% |
| Bovonratwet et al 201946 | 8 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 17 | 61% |
| Cher et al 201844 | 10 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 19 | 68% |
| Goh et al 202050 | 9 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 19 | 68% |
| Klasan et al 201949 | 8 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 16 | 57% |
| Kodaira et al 201948 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 14 | 50% |
| Maempel et al 201540 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 17 | 61% |
| Murphy et al 201847 | 9 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 21 | 75% |
| Sezgin et al 20197 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 15 | 54% |
| Skinner et al 201641 | 10 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 17 | 61% |
| Townsend et al 201842 | 8 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 17 | 61% |
| Yun et al 201843 | 10 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 18 | 64% |
Discussion
The most important findings of this systematic review are that older patients (≥ 80 years) receiving TKA have higher rates of surgical and medical complications, as well as higher mortality, compared to younger patients (< 80 years). These findings therefore refute the hypothesis that older patients receiving TKA have similar outcomes to younger patients. The literature also reports greater LoS for older patients, but inconsistent findings regarding PROs. The majority of studies reported no difference in PROs between the two age groups, while some studies reported worse PROs in older patients, and fewer studies reported better PROs for older patients. It is worth noting that contrasting trends were reported for different PROs within three studies.43,44,50
In the present study, it was difficult to compare the rate of complications between older and younger patients due to differing definitions and groupings. This prohibited quantitative analysis of differences between these two groups, which is a barrier also experienced by Kuperman et al.17 Additionally, drawing conclusions based on small differences in absolute numbers was deemed to have limited value. Furthermore, selection bias may exist, as patients with fewer comorbidities are more likely to be offered elective TKA.54 Variations in peri- and postoperative management are rarely reported in the literature and may have an effect on complication rates; for example, physical therapy that commences soon after surgery, as well as prophylaxis strategies, can both decrease rates of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolisms.55
The findings from the present systematic review revealed that the older population is at a much greater risk of suffering postoperative cognitive dysfunction, such as confusion or delirium, in comparison to the younger population. Some studies have found that general anaesthesia may increase the risk of early postoperative cognitive dysfunction, and recommended the use of regional anaesthesia where possible, particularly in more frail or vulnerable patients.56,57 The present study also revealed similar rates of wound complications in both older and younger populations, which are more likely influenced by surgeon experience and technique. In contrast, older patients experienced higher rates of surgical and medical complications, which depend more on the physical condition of the patients. This finding was also reflected in a recent systematic review of total joint replacements by Murphy et al.16 Older patients should therefore not be excluded from consideration for primary TKA based on age alone, but with consideration of preoperative physical condition.
Mortality outcomes are important when assessing the safety of joint replacement surgery for the elderly.47 Overall, in the present study, mortality was consistently higher in the older population; however, the actual number of deaths within the first 90 days following TKA was relatively low, suggesting it is safe to offer TKA to the older population. Two studies47,49 reported higher mortality within 10 years following TKA for older patients when compared to younger patients, which is in line with the life expectancy for patients over 85 years of age.58 Furthermore, Skinner et al41 reported high mortality in their nonagenarian population that received TKA, which was equal to that expected for the general population aged 90 years or older.
In the present systematic review, eight studies reported greater LoS for older patients compared to younger patients; however, only three studies found a statistically significant difference (range, p < 0.001 to p = 0.001), making it difficult to draw a definitive conclusion. Kupermen et al17 pointed out that whilst greater LoS increases the direct cost of TKA, this additional expense should be weighed against the costs of ongoing support for patients with functional deficits if they do not undergo surgery. Compared to studies performed in North America, Europe, and Australia, studies from Asia have reported considerably greater LoS (ranging from 16.8 to 20.9 days) in both age groups, possibly because patients receive in-hospital postoperative physical therapy, and are only discharged when able to walk steadily.48 A study by Pitter et al reported that fast-track TKA and THA is feasible in most patients aged ≥ 85; however, to prevent readmissions, clinicians should monitor postoperative anaemia and medical complications.59
In the present systematic review, most of the studies reported similar PROs following TKA in both older and younger patients. Although two studies reported significantly worse OKS for older patients (p < 0.001),49,50 both studies found that the mean OKS for older patients was above the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) of 37 points.60 Furthermore, three studies reported KSS function and found worse scores in older patients,15,40,50 likely because of comorbidities associated with advancing age, which can cause functional decline.61 In fact, the older population have ‘similar to worse’ baseline functional scores compared to the younger population,62 as older patients may delay or be denied surgery in the earlier stages of OA, on account of perceived surgical risks.17 It is worth noting that in the last systematic review on the topic, Kuperman et al17 found improvements in function to be similar for both older and younger patients.
The results of the present systematic review should be interpreted with the following limitations in mind. First, there is considerable heterogeneity in the characteristics of the included cohorts, which made quantitative comparisons between cohorts difficult. Second, although the overall level of quality was good to fair for the majority of studies, only two were prospective comparative studies (both Level II). Third, it is possible that selection bias may exist, as patients with fewer comorbidities are more likely to be offered elective TKA, and the results are not necessarily pertinent to the general older population. Fourth, while the PROs employed by the included studies evaluated pain as a component of their overall score (e.g. KSS, WOMAC, OKS), none comprehensively assessed pain in explicit detail. As pain is one of the primary indications for arthroplasty,63 future studies should aim to quantify improvement in pain using standardized measures. Finally, only five out of the 13 studies performed a priori power analysis to determine the required sample size.
Conclusion
In comparison with younger patients (< 80 years), older patients (≥ 80 years) receiving TKA have higher rates of surgical and medical complications, as well as higher mortality. The literature also reports greater LoS for older patients, but inconsistent findings regarding PROs. The present findings provide both surgeons and older patients with clearer updated evidence, to help them make informed decisions regarding surgical intervention in end-stage OA of the knee, considering the risks and benefits within this age group. Older patients should therefore not be excluded from consideration for primary TKA based on age alone, but with consideration of preoperative physical condition.
Open access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed.
OC reports personal fees from Zimmer, personal fees from Arthrex, personal fees from Tornier-Corin, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no conflict of interest relevant to this work.
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed.
Supplemental material is available for this paper at https://online.boneandjoint.org.uk/doi/suppl/10.1302/2058-5241.6.200150
References
- 1.↑
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (Population Division). World population prospects 2019: highlights. New York, NY: UN, 2019.
- 2.↑
Nemes S, Rolfson O & W-Dahl Aet al. Historical view and future demand for knee arthroplasty in Sweden. Acta Orthop 2015;86:426–431.
- 3.↑
French HP, Galvin R, Horgan NF, Kenny RA. Prevalence and burden of osteoarthritis amongst older people in Ireland: findings from The Irish LongituDinal Study on Ageing (TILDA). Eur J Public Health 2016;26:192–198.
- 4.↑
Krishnan E, Fries JF, Kwoh CK. Primary knee and hip arthroplasty among nonagenarians and centenarians in the United States. Arthritis Rheum 2007;57:1038–1042.
- 5.↑
Hernández-Vaquero D, Fernández-Carreira JM, Pérez-Hernández D, Fernández-Lombardía J, García-Sandoval MA. Total knee arthroplasty in the elderly: is there an age limit? J Arthroplasty 2006;21:358–361.
- 6.↑
Kennedy JW, Johnston L, Cochrane L, Boscainos PJ. Total knee arthroplasty in the elderly: does age affect pain, function or complications? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013;471:1964–1969.
- 7.↑
Sezgin EA, Robertsson O, W-Dahl A, Lidgren L. Nonagenarians qualify for total knee arthroplasty: a report on 329 patients from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register 2000–2016. Acta Orthop 2019;90:53–59.
- 8.↑
McCalden RW, Robert CE, Howard JL, Naudie DD, McAuley JP, MacDonald SJ. Comparison of outcomes and survivorship between patients of different age groups following TKA. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:83–86.
- 9.↑
Pitta M, Khoshbin A & Lalani Aet al. Age-related functional decline following total knee arthroplasty: risk adjustment is mandatory. J Arthroplasty 2019;34:228–234.
- 10.↑
Zicat B, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, Devane PA, Nott L. Total knee arthroplasty in the octogenarian. J Arthroplasty 1993;8:395–400.
- 11.
Easterlin MC, Chang DG, Talamini M, Chang DC. Older age increases short-term surgical complications after primary knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013;471:2611–2620.
- 12.↑
Fang M, Noiseux N, Linson E, Cram P. The effect of advancing age on total joint replacement outcomes. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 2015;6:173–179.
- 13.↑
Preston SD, Southall AR, Nel M, Das SK. Geriatric surgery is about disease, not age. J R Soc Med 2008;101:409–415.
- 14.
Jämsen E, Puolakka T & Eskelinen Aet al. Predictors of mortality following primary hip and knee replacement in the aged: a single-center analysis of 1,998 primary hip and knee replacements for primary osteoarthritis. Acta Orthop 2013;84:44–53.
- 15.↑
Andreozzi V, Conteduca F & Iorio Ret al. Comorbidities rather than age affect medium-term outcome in octogenarian patients after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020;28:3142–3148.
- 16.↑
Murphy BPD, Dowsey MM, Choong PFM. The impact of advanced age on the outcomes of primary total hip and knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a systematic review. JBJS Rev 2018;6:e6.
- 17.↑
Kuperman EF, Schweizer M, Joy P, Gu X, Fang MM. The effects of advanced age on primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Geriatr 2016;16:41.
- 18.↑
Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PCet al; Cochrane Bias Methods Group. Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
- 19.↑
McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BDet al; and the PRISMA-DTA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 2018;319:388–396.
- 20.↑
Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998;52:377–384.
- 21.↑
Hooper P, Jutai JW, Strong G, Russell-Minda E. Age-related macular degeneration and low-vision rehabilitation: a systematic review. Can J Ophthalmol 2008;43:180–187.
- 22.↑
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557–560.
- 23.↑
Faber T, Ravaud P, Riveros C, Perrodeau E, Dechartres A. Meta-analyses including non-randomized studies of therapeutic interventions: a methodological review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2016;16:35.
- 24.↑
Koh IJ, Kim GH, Kong CG, Park SW, Park TY, In Y. The patient’s age and American Society of Anesthesiologists status are reasonable criteria for deciding whether to perform same-day bilateral TKA. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:770–775.
- 25.
Pope D, El-Othmani MM, Manning BT, Sepula M, Markwell SJ, Saleh KJ. Impact of age, gender and anesthesia modality on post-operative pain in total knee arthroplasty patients. Iowa Orthop J 2015;35:92–98.
- 26.
Yun SH, Park JC, Kim SR, Choi YS. Effects of dexmedetomidine on serum interleukin-6, hemodynamic stability, and postoperative pain relief in elderly patients under spinal anesthesia. Acta Med Okayama 2016;70:37–43.
- 27.
Bayliss LE, Culliford D & Monk APet al. The effect of patient age at intervention on risk of implant revision after total replacement of the hip or knee: a population-based cohort study. Lancet 2017;389:1424–1430.
- 28.
Feng B, Lin J, Jin J, Qian WW, Wang W, Weng XS. Thirty-day postoperative complications following primary total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective study of incidence and risk factors at a single center in China. Chin Med J (Engl) 2017;130:2551–2556.
- 29.
Menendez ME, Greber EM, Schumacher CS, Lowry Barnes C. Predictors of acute ischemic stroke after total knee arthroplasty. J Surg Orthop Adv 2017;26:148–153.
- 30.
Prattingerová J, Sarvikivi E, Huotari K, Ollgren J, Lyytikäinen O. Surgical site infections following hip and knee arthroplastic surgery: trends and risk factors of Staphylococcus aureus infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2019;40:211–213.
- 31.
Jamakorzyan C, Meyssonnier V & Kerroumi Yet al. Curative treatment of prosthetic joint infection in patients younger than 80 vs. 80 or older. Joint Bone Spine 2019;86:369–372.
- 32.
Inoue D, Xu C, Yazdi H, Parvizi J. Age alone is not a risk factor for periprosthetic joint infection. J Hosp Infect 2019;103:64–68.
- 33.
Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse MR, Beswick ADet al; National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Risk factors associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection following knee replacement: an observational cohort study from England and Wales. Lancet Infect Dis 2019;19:589–600.
- 34.
Roger C, Debuyzer E & Dehl Met al. Factors associated with hospital stay length, discharge destination, and 30-day readmission rate after primary hip or knee arthroplasty: retrospective cohort study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2019;105:949–955.
- 35.
Martinez-Carranza N, Pettas A, Razzaz D, Broström E, Hedström M. Younger age is associated with increased odds of manipulation under anesthesia for joint stiffness after total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2019;105:1067–1071.
- 36.
Yilmaz E, Poell A & Baecker Het al. Poor outcome of octogenarians admitted to ICU due to periprosthetic joint infections: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2020;21:304.
- 37.
Klasan A, Putnis SE & Yeo WWet al. Should sequential bilateral total knee arthroplasty be limited to patients younger than 80? A two-arm propensity matched study. J Knee Surg 2020. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1712100 [Epub ahead of print].
- 38.
Brown MJ, Koh NP, Bell SW, Jones B, Blyth M. Age and gender related differences in infection, thromboembolism, revision and death in knee arthroplasty in a Scottish population. Scott Med J 2020;65:89–93.
- 39.↑
Küçükosman G, Öztoprak H, Öztürk T, Ayoglu H. Factors associated with postoperative mortality in geriatric orthopedic surgery: a retrospective analysis of single center data. Journal of Anesthesiol Reanim Special Soc 2019;27:186–192.
- 40.↑
Maempel JF, Riddoch F, Calleja N, Brenkel IJ. Longer hospital stay, more complications, and increased mortality but substantially improved function after knee replacement in older patients. Acta Orthop 2015;86:451–456.
- 41.↑
Skinner D, Tadros BJ, Bray E, Elsherbiny M, Stafford G. Clinical outcome following primary total hip or knee replacement in nonagenarians. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2016;98:258–264.
- 42.↑
Townsend LA, Roubion RC & Bourgeois DMet al. Impact of age on patient-reported outcome measures in total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2018;31:580–584.
- 43.↑
Yun ST, Kim BK, Ahn BM, Oh KJ. Difference in the degree of improvement in patient-reported outcomes after total knee arthroplasty between octogenarians and sexagenarians: a propensity score matching analysis. Aging Clin Exp Res 2018;30:1379–1384.
- 44.↑
Cher EWL, Tay KS, Zhang K, Tan SB, Howe TS, Koh JSB. The effect of comorbidities and age on functional outcomes after total knee arthroplasty in the octogenarian: a matched cohort study. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 2018;9:2151459318769508.
- 45.↑
Austin DC, Torchia MT, Moschetti WE, Jevsevar DS, Keeney BJ. Patient outcomes after total knee arthroplasty in patients older than 80 years. J Arthroplasty 2018;33:3465–3473.
- 46.↑
Bovonratwet P, Fu MC, Tyagi V, Gu A, Sculco PK, Grauer JN. Is discharge within a day of total knee arthroplasty safe in the octogenarian population? J Arthroplasty 2019;34:235–241.
- 47.↑
Murphy BPD, Dowsey MM, Spelman T, Choong PFM. The impact of older age on patient outcomes following primary total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2018;100-B:1463–1470.
- 48.↑
Kodaira S, Kikuchi T, Hakozaki M, Konno S. Total knee arthroplasty in Japanese patients aged 80 years or older. Clin Interv Aging 2019;14:681–688.
- 49.↑
Klasan A, Putnis SE, Yeo WW, Fritsch BA, Coolican MR, Parker DA. Advanced age is not a barrier to total knee arthroplasty: a detailed analysis of outcomes and complications in an elderly cohort compared with average age total knee arthroplasty patients. J Arthroplasty 2019;34:1938–1945.
- 50.↑
Goh GS, Liow MHL, Chen JY, Tay DK, Lo NN, Yeo SJ. Can octogenarians undergoing total knee arthroplasty experience similar functional outcomes, quality of life, and satisfaction rates as their younger counterparts? A propensity score matched analysis of 1,188 patients. J Arthroplasty 2020;35:1833–1839.
- 51.↑
Ingelsrud LH, Roos EM, Terluin B, Gromov K, Husted H, Troelsen A. Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement. Acta Orthop 2018;89:541–547.
- 52.↑
Lizaur-Utrilla A, Gonzalez-Parreño S, Martinez-Mendez D, Miralles-Muñoz FA, Lopez-Prats FA. Minimal clinically important differences and substantial clinical benefits for Knee Society Scores. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020;28:1473–1478.
- 53.↑
Yeo MGH, Goh GS, Chen JY, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, Liow MHL. Are Oxford Hip Score and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index useful predictors of clinical meaningful improvement and satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty 2020;35:2458–2464.
- 54.↑
Jones CM, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Athanasiou T. Guidelines for diagnostic tests and diagnostic accuracy in surgical research. J Invest Surg 2010;23:57–65.
- 55.↑
Brander V, Stulberg SD. Rehabilitation after hip- and knee-joint replacement: an experience- and evidence-based approach to care. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2006;85:S98–S118.
- 56.↑
Mason SE, Noel-Storr A, Ritchie CW. The impact of general and regional anesthesia on the incidence of post-operative cognitive dysfunction and post-operative delirium: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Alzheimers Dis 2010;22:67–79.
- 57.↑
Zywiel MG, Prabhu A, Perruccio AV, Gandhi R. The influence of anesthesia and pain management on cognitive dysfunction after joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014;472:1453–1466.
- 59.↑
Pitter FT, Jørgensen CC, Lindberg-Larsen M, Kehlet H; Lundbeck Foundation Center for fast-track hip and knee replacement collaborative group: postoperative morbidity and discharge destinations after fast-track hip and knee arthroplasty in patients older than 85 years. Anesth Analg 2016;122:1807–1815.
- 60.↑
Keurentjes JC, Van Tol FR & Fiocco Met al. Patient acceptable symptom states after total hip or knee replacement at mid-term follow-up: thresholds of the Oxford Hip and Knee Scores. Bone Joint Res 2014;3:7–13.
- 61.↑
Palleschi L, De Alfieri W & Salani Bet al. Functional recovery of elderly patients hospitalized in geriatric and general medicine units. The PROgetto DImissioni in GEriatria Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2011;59:193–199.
- 62.↑
Cram P, Lu X, Kates SL, Singh JA, Li Y, Wolf BR. Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991–2010. JAMA 2012;308:1227–1236.
- 63.↑
Gademan MG, Hofstede SN, Vliet Vlieland TP, Nelissen RG, Marang-van de Mheen PJ. Indication criteria for total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis: a state-of-the-science overview. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2016;17:463.
