Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with BMI of ≥50 kg/m2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The obesity epidemic has given rise to an orthopaedic patient subgroup with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥50 kg/m 2 . Without sound evidential guidance, arthroplasty surgeons and anesthesiologists do not know whether they can push the limits of the surgical feasibility of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) without risks of harm. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study of patients who had undergone primary TKA for degenerative arthritis at our academic center (n = 10,389; 6,821 women, 4,070 men, and 38 unknown), we compared the outcomes between patients with a BMI of ≥50 kg/m 2 (n = 627) and patients in other weight classes. The average patient follow-up was 8.6 years. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between BMI and revision risk, using overweight patients (BMI = 25 to 29.99 kg/m 2 ) as the reference group while adjusting for patient age and sex. Patient satisfaction, pain scores on a visual analogue scale (VAS), and the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were compared among groups preoperatively and at 1, 5, and 10 years postoperatively. RESULTS: In the first year after surgery, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for revision TKA for patients with a BMI of ≥50 kg/m 2 was 3.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9 to 7.2), with overweight patients as the reference. There was virtually no difference between patients with a BMI of 35 to 39.99 kg/m 2 and those with a BMI of 40 to 49.99 kg/m 2 . After the first year, the HR was 1.2 (95% CI = 0.7 to 2.4) for revision TKA for patients with a BMI of ≥50 kg/m 2 . Those patients reported worse preoperative function of the knee, with a median OKS of 15 versus 23 for overweight patients. For obese patients, each additional unit of BMI corresponded with an additional OKS improvement of 0.07 point (95% CI = 0.04 to 0.10) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the increased risk of failure of TKA in patients with a BMI of ≥50 kg/m 2 in the first year after surgery, but we found no evidence of worse outcomes in the 40 to 49.99 kg/m 2 group compared with the 35 to 39.99 kg/m 2 group. The increase in the revision risk in the ≥50 kg/m 2 group was found only in the first postoperative year and plateaued afterwards. Despite worse function and higher failure rates, patients with a BMI of ≥50 kg/m 2 reported benefits and high satisfaction with TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".