Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of re-revision knee arthroplasty (re-revision KA) is increasing and associated with high complication and failure rates. The aim of this study was to investigate re-revision rates, complications, and patient-reported outcomes following re-revision KA and factors associated with poor outcome. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 206 patients (250 knees) undergoing re-revision KA at a major revision center from 2015 to 2018. The mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 0 to 61) and mean age at re-revision KA was 69 years (range, 31 to 91). The main indications for surgery were prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n=171/250, 68.4%) and aseptic loosening (n=25/250, 10.0%). We compared re-revision rates, joint function, and complications for aseptic and infective indications. Logistic regressions were performed to identify risk factors for further reoperation. RESULTS: The estimated re-revision rates at 2 years were 28.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 22.7-35.9) and at 4 years were 42.0% (95%CI: 32.8-52.6). Mean Oxford Knee Score was 26 points (range, 1 to 48). Mean EuroQoL-5D-5L-utility was 0.539 (range, -0.511 to 1.000). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that PJI (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.39, 95%CI 1.06-5.40, p=0.036), greater number of previous surgeries (OR 1.18, 95%CI 1.04-1.33, p=0.008) and higher Elixhauser score (OR 1.06, 95%CI 1.01-1.13, p=0.045) were independently associated to further surgery. CONCLUSION: Re-revision KA carried a high risk of early failure. Multiply revised joints and patients with more comorbidities had worse function. Patients undergoing re-revision KA for PJI should be counseled to expect higher failure rates and complications than patients who have aseptic indications.

Original publication




Journal article


J Arthroplasty

Publication Date



Knee arthroplasty, prosthetic joint infection, revision