Table 1: Baseline characteristics of participants aged 85 years with and without total joint replacement in the past. Yes (N = 38) 27 (71) 23 (61) 22 (58) 25 (66) 5 (13) 8 (21) 27.6 (4.5) 27 (25–28) 1.5 (0–2) 3 (2–5.5) 1 (3) 23 (61) 3 (8) 0 (0) 1 (3) 34 (92) Total joint replacement 3 No (N = 561) 369 (66) 322 (57) 331 (59) 304 (54) 155 (28) 102 (18) 27.1 (4.5) 26 (22–28) 2 (1–3) 3 (1–5) 47 (8) 380 (68) 82 (15) 11 (2) 64 (11) 144 (28) Journal of Aging Research Female (number, %) Widowed (number, %) Education: primary school only (number, %) Living situation Independent (number, %) Sheltered (number, %) Institutionalised (number, %) Clinical characteristics Body Mass Index (mean, SD) Mini Mental State Examination (points, median, IQR) Geriatric Depression Scale (points, median, IQR) Total number of medicines (median, IQR) Comorbidity Stroke (number, %) CVD∗ (number, %) Diabetes mellitus (number, %) Parkinson (number, %) COPD (number, %) Arthritis$ (number, %) IQR: Interquartile Range, CVD: Cardiovascular Disease. COPD: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease,∗CVD included myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, and hypertension. Arthritis included rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. $P < 0.001. was slightly lower in the group of participants with a joint replacement in the past compared to the group of participants without a total joint replacement. There were no statistically signiﬁcant diﬀerences found between the two groups on any parameter except for the prevalence of arthritis. From the 38 participants, 28 had one total joint replacement. Five had 2 TKR’s and three had 2 THR’s, one had both a TKR and a THR, and one had a THR and 2 TKR’s. 3.1. Physical Functioning, Daily Living Activities, Joint Com- plaints, and Self-Reported Health. Table 2 shows the func- tional characteristics of the participants with and without joint replacement at age 85 years. In both groups, most of the participants were able to walk. Participants with a total joint replacement walked signiﬁcantly slower compared to participants without joint replacement (P = 0.006). All other tested items addressing physical functioning were similar between both groups. In terms of daily activities and self- reported health status, there were also no diﬀerences between both groups. The number of participants with a total joint replace- ment complaining about hip pain was signiﬁcantly higher compared to the number of participants without a joint replacement (P = 0.007). Within those complaining of hip pain, 11 participants had received at least one THR and four participants had at least one TKR in the past. The number of participants complaining about knee pain diﬀered between both groups; however, this result did not reach statistical signiﬁcance (P = 0.06). Within those complaining of knee pain, 8 participants had received at least one TKR and nine participants had at least one THR. Within those complaining about both hip and knee pain, 9 had received a TKR and 14 a THR. From the participants with a THR (N = 26), 42% complained about hip pain and 35% about knee pain. From the participants with a TKR (N = 14), 29% complained about hip pain and 57% about knee pain. 3.2. Survival. During a total follow-up period of 12 years (median 5.8 years, interquartile range 3.1–8.9 years), 542 (90.2%) participants died. Figure 1 shows the Kaplan-Meier survival curve of participants with and without joint replace- ment. During the ﬁrst 10 years, mortality was attenuated in the group of participants with a joint replacement. When applying Cox regression to calculate a hazard ratio (HR) adjusted for gender, no signiﬁcant diﬀerences in survival were found after followup of 12 years dependent on the history of joint replacement (HR of 0.86, 95%-CI [0.61, 1.22], P = 0.41). Cox regression up to eight years of follow- up showed a survival beneﬁt of the participants with a joint replacement (HR of 0.60 (95%-CI [0.37, 0.98], P = 0.04). 4. Discussion Within the present study, characteristics of the oldest old with and without a total joint replacement in the past