Hip joint center lateralization minimally affects the biomechanics of patient-specific flanged acetabular components: A computational model.

Patient-specific flanged acetabular components are utilized to treat failed total hip arthroplasties with large acetabular defects. Previous clinical studies from our institution showed that these implants tend to lateralize the acetabular center of rotation. However, the clinical impact of lateralization on implant survivorship is debated. Our goal was to develop a finite element model to quantify how lateralization of the native hip center affects periprosthetic strain and implant-bone micromotion distributions in a static level gait loading condition. To build the model, we computationally created a superomedial acetabular defect in a computed tomography 3D reconstruction of a native pelvis and designed a flanged acetabular implant to address this simulated bone defect. We modeled two implants, one with ~1 cm and a second with ~2 cm of hip center lateralization. We applied the maximum hip contact force and corresponding abductor force observed during level gait. The resulting strains were compared to bone fatigue strength (0.3% strain) and the micromotions were compared to the threshold for bone ingrowth (20 µm). Overall, the model demonstrated that the additional lateralization only slightly increased the area of bone at risk of failure and decreased the areas compatible with bone ingrowth. This computational study of patient-specific acetabular implants establishes the utility of our modeling approach. Further refinement will yield a model that can explore a multitude of variables and could be used to develop a biomechanically-based acetabular bone loss classification system to guide the development of patient-specific implants in the treatment of large acetabular bone defects.

Contemporary Isolated Bearing Exchange for the Management of Hip Instability Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Isolated ball and liner exchanges (IBLEs) can be performed to increase hip joint stability, but historical results have been mixed due to a lack of head size options or dual mobility articulations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the contemporary results of IBLEs in patients who have instability following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 65 primary THAs from 2016 to 2020 with hip instability undergoing IBLE or conversion to dual mobility articulation. There were 31 men and 34 women who had an average age of 70 years (range, 26 to 92). The mean time to revision from primary was 40.1 months (range, 1 to 120). In 52 cases, IBLE was performed using conventional bearings, while 13 hips were converted to dual mobility. Radiographic factors, including acetabular component orientation, reproduction of hip joint offset, leg lengths, and outcomes such as recurrent instability requiring subsequent revision and patient-reported outcome measure, were recorded and compared. RESULTS: There were 12 (18.4%) hips that experienced subsequent instability and required another revision (17.3% ball and liner exchange versus 23.1% dual mobility articulation, P = .615). The mean time to rerevision for instability was 17.1 months. There were no significant differences in either acetabular component anteversion (P = .25) or restoration of hip joint offset (P = .87) in patients who required another revision for instability compared to those who did not, respectively. At 1 year, patients undergoing conventional bearing exchange reported higher Hip Dysfunction Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacements (P = .002) and Veterans Rand physical component (P = .023) scores compared to those who underwent a conversion to dual mobility articulation. Only age > 75 years at the time of surgery was associated with increased risk for dislocation (odds ratio 7.2, confidence interval 1.2 to 43.7, P = .032). CONCLUSIONS: Isolated bearing exchanges for instability following THA remained at high risk for subsequent instability. Conversion to dual mobility articulations did not reduce the risk of reoperation.

Comparative effectiveness of azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil for myasthenia gravis (PROMISE-MG): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Myasthenia gravis is an autoimmune disorder of the neuromuscular junction. Treatment typically includes symptomatic oral cholinesterase inhibitors, immunosuppression, and immunomodulation. In addition to corticosteroids, azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil are the most frequently used immunosuppressants in North America. We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of these two drugs, and to assess the effect of the dose and duration of treatment. METHODS: We did a prospective cohort study at 19 academic centres in Canada and the USA. We included patients (aged ≥18 years) with autoimmune myasthenia gravis, who were never treated with immunosuppressants. Treating clinicians determined the choice of medication, dose, follow-up intervals, and drug monitoring. Outcome measures and adverse events were recorded at each visit. We assessed two co-primary outcomes. The first was the patient-reported Myasthenia Gravis-Quality of Life 15-revised (MGQOL-15r) score, measured as the mean change from treatment initiation to the follow-up visit with the lowest score. A clinically meaningful reduction (CMR) in MGQOL-15r was defined as a 5-point decrease. The second was a composite clinical outcome of disease improvement (Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America Post-Intervention Status Minimal Manifestations or better) and low adverse event burden (defined as grade ≤1 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). We also compared these outcomes in patients receiving an adequate dose and duration of azathioprine (≥2 mg/kg per day for at least 12 months) or mycophenolate mofetil (≥2 g per day for at least 8 months) and a lower dose or shorter duration of these agents. We used propensity score weighting with generalised linear regression models. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03490539). FINDINGS: Between May 1, 2018, and Aug 31, 2020, 167 patients were enrolled; 85 did not receive azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil and were excluded. Four were excluded from outcome analyses because they had scores of 0 on an outcome measure at treatment initiation. Of the 78 patients included in analyses, 47 received mycophenolate mofetil (median follow-up 25 months [IQR 13·5-31·5]) and 31 received azathioprine (median follow-up 20 months [IQR 13-30]). The mean change in MG-QOL15r was -10·4 (95% CI -18·9 to -1·3) with mycophenolate mofetil and -6·8 (-17·2 to 3·6) with azathioprine (mean difference -3·3, 95% CI -7·7 to 1·2; p=0·15). 38 (81%) of 47 patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil and 18 (57%) of 31 receiving azathioprine had a CMR in MG-QOL15r (risk difference 24·0%; 95% CI -0·2 to 48·0; p=0·052). The clinical composite outcome was achieved in 22 (47·7%) of 47 patients who received mycophenolate mofetil and nine (28·1%) of 31 who received azathioprine (risk difference 19·6%, 95% CI -4·9 to 44·2; p=0·12). Descriptive analysis did not find a difference in the proportion of patients reaching a CMR in MG-QOL15r between the adequate dose and duration group and the lower dose or shorter duration group. Adverse events occurred in 11 (32%) of 34 patients who received azathioprine and nine (19%) of 48 who received mycophenolate mofetil. The most frequent adverse events were hepatotoxicity with azathioprine (five [15%] of 34) and gastrointestinal disturbances (seven [15%] of 48) with mycophenolate mofetil. There were no study-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: More than half of patients treated with azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil felt their quality of life improved; no difference in clinical outcomes was noted between the two drugs. Adverse events associated with azathioprine were potentially more serious than those with mycophenolate mofetil, although mycophenolate mofetil is teratogenic. Lower than recommended doses of azathioprine might be effective, with reduced dose-dependent adverse events. More comparative effectiveness studies are required to inform treatment choices in myasthenia gravis. FUNDING: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America.

Does Approach Matter in Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Comparison of Early Reoperations Between Direct Anterior and Postero-Lateral Approach.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on whether direct anterior approach (DAA) or postero-lateral approach (PLA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) confers a lower risk of postoperative complications. Robotic assistance in THA results in a more consistently accurate component position compared to manual THA. The objective of this study was to compare rates of dislocation, reoperation, revision, and patient-reported outcome measures between patients undergoing DAA and PLA robotic-assisted primary THA. METHODS: We identified 2,040 consecutive robotic-assisted primary THAs performed for primary osteoarthritis, using DAA (n = 497) or PLA (n = 1,542) between 2017 and 2020. The mean follow-up was 18 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated survivorship free of dislocation, reoperation, and revision. Achievement of patient acceptable symptom state and minimum clinically important difference were used to compare changes in the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS JR) and Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS: Dislocation was rare in this series (14 in 2,040, 0.7%), including 1 of 497 (0.2%) in the DAA cohort and 13 of 1,542 (0.8%) in the PLA cohort (P = .210). There was no difference in 2-year reoperation-free survivorship (97.8 versus 98.6%, P = .59) or revision-free survivorship (98.8 versus 99.0%, P = .87) at any time point. After controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, there was no difference in dislocation, reoperation, or revision. At 6-week follow-up, after controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, patients in the DAA cohort had higher odds of achieving HOOS JR minimum clinically important difference (odds ratio = 2.01, P = .012) and HOOS JR patient acceptable symptom state (odds ratio = 1.72, P = .028). There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures by 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: For robotic-assisted primary THA, DAA may confer enhanced early (<6 weeks) functional recovery compared to the PLA, but there was no significant difference in postoperative dislocation, reoperation, or revision rates.

Telemedicine in Arthroplasty Patients: Which Factors Are Associated With High Satisfaction?

Background: During the initial coronavirus pandemic lockdown period, remote hip and knee arthroplasty care was heavily employed out of necessity. However, data on patient satisfaction with telemedicine specific to hip and knee arthroplasty patients remains unknown. Methods: All patients who had a telemedicine visit in the hip and knee arthroplasty department and completed a telemedicine satisfaction survey at a specialty hospital from April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were identified. Patient satisfaction with telemedicine, gauged through a series of questions, were analyzed and evaluated over time. Independent factors associated with high satisfaction, defined as the "Top Box" response to the survey question "Likelihood of your recommending our video visit service to others," were identified. Results: Overall, 29,003 patients who had an in-person or telemedicine visit in the hip and knee arthroplasty department during the study period were identified. During the initial coronavirus pandemic lockdown period, defined as April 1, 2020-May 31, 2020, rate of overall telemedicine utilization was approximately 84%. After the initial lockdown period, the rate of overall telemedicine utilization was approximately 8% of all visits per month. Average satisfaction scores for a series of 14 questions were consistently above 4.5 out of 5. Multivariable regression revealed younger age, particularly 18-64 years old, to be the only independent factor associated with high satisfaction with telemedicine. The rate of high satisfaction remained statistically similar throughout the study period (P > .05). Conclusions: Patient satisfaction with telemedicine was consistently high in various domains and remained high throughout the study period, regardless of loosened pandemic restrictions. This technology will most likely continue to be utilized, but perhaps it should be targeted at patients younger than 65 years of age.

The John N. Insall Award: Does Melatonin Improve Subjective Sleep Quality After Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is a common problem following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study was to determine if exogenous melatonin improves sleep quality following primary TKA. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. A total of 172 patients undergoing unilateral TKA for primary knee osteoarthritis were randomized to receive either 5 mg melatonin (n = 86) or 125 mg vitamin C placebo (n = 86) nightly for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) at 6 weeks and 90 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included 6-week and 90-day patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), morphine milligram equivalents prescribed, medication compliance, adverse events, and 90-day readmissions. RESULTS: Mean PSQI scores worsened at 6 weeks before returning to the preoperative baseline at 90 days in both groups. There were no differences in PSQI scores between melatonin and placebo groups at 6 weeks (10.2 ± 4.2 versus 10.5 ± 4.4, P = .66) or 90 days (8.1 ± 4.1 versus 7.5 ± 4.0, P = .43). Melatonin did not improve the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, Lower Extremity Activity Scale, Visual Analog Scale for pain, or Veterans Rand 12 Physical Component Score or Mental Component Score at 6 weeks or 90 days. Poor sleep quality was associated with worse PROMs at 6 weeks and 90 days on univariate and multivariable analyses, but melatonin did not modify these associations. There were no differences in morphine milligram equivalents prescribed, medication compliances, adverse events, or 90-day readmissions between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Exogenous melatonin did not improve subjective sleep quality or PROMs at 6 weeks or 90 days following TKA. Poor sleep quality was associated with worse patient-reported function and pain. Our results do not support the routine use of melatonin after TKA.

The Use of Plant-Based Polysaccharide (PSP) Agents May Improve Early Outcomes Following Total Knee Arthroplasty-A Proof-of-Concept Study.

Our study sought to investigate the effects of a topical plant-based polysaccharide (PSP) as an adjunctive hemostat to minimize blood loss and improve early clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary TKA. In this multi-center and randomized proof-of-concept study, 61 patients undergoing TKA were randomly assigned to one of two groups: A) intraoperative utilization of PSP (n=31) or B) no intervention (n=30). The primary outcomes were blood loss and change in hemoglobin, measured preoperatively and 24 hours postoperatively. Other endpoints included postoperative complications, Knee Society Score (KSS), knee range of motion (ROM), and thigh circumference. There was no difference in postoperative change of hemoglobin or calculated blood loss between the PSP and control groups. The PSP group achieved elevated flexion at two weeks (100.1° vs. 86.6°, p<0.05) and better change in KSS from preop to 90 days (29.5 vs. 22.4, p<0.05) than the controls. Some early postoperative outcomes were improved, which suggests a potential benefit of using PSP in primary TKA. However, the clinical significance of these differences warrants further investigation in a larger randomized trial.

Arthritis Foundation/HSS Workshop on Hip Osteoarthritis, Part 4: Nonoperative Options, Machine Learning in Predicting Total Hip Arthroplasty, Robotics, and Phenotyping to Guide Precision Rehabilitation.

Far more publications are available for osteoarthritis of the knee than of the hip. Recognizing this research gap, the Arthritis Foundation (AF), in partnership with the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS), convened an in-person meeting of thought leaders to review the state of the science of and clinical approaches to hip osteoarthritis. This article summarizes the recommendations gleaned from presentations given in the "late-stage osteoarthritis" session of the 2023 Hip Osteoarthritis Clinical Studies Conference, which took place on February 17 and 18, 2023, in New York City. It covers conservative treatment, decision-making in end-stage hip osteoarthritis, advancements in robotics, and the role of phenotyping in precision rehabilitation post-total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Correcting Hip Dysplasia in Young Adults: Intraoperative Navigation and Outcomes.

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) often leads to characteristic acetabular dysplasia and typical femoral anomalies. There are numerous treatments for skeletally mature patients with DDH including hip arthroscopy, pelvic and femoral osteotomies, as well as total hip arthroplasty. Before proceeding to an arthroplasty procedure, it can be helpful to obtain an opinion of a hip preservation specialist to ascertain if alternative surgical treatments could contribute to the patient's care. In general, the use of robotic navigation has been associated with a higher proportion of cups placed in the Lewinnek safe zone, larger improvements in Harris Hip Scores, and no difference in overall complication rates in comparison to manual total hip arthroplasty. The use of robotic navigation allows for both 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional preoperative templating, enabling the surgeon to plan the position of the construct such that it achieves maximum bony purchase and hip stability. In complex DDH cases, surgeons can work with a biomechanics department to complete a fit check assessment, which utilizes 3-dimensional templating software to ascertain the appropriateness of the implant's geometry with the patient's anatomy. Furthermore, a 3-dimensional printed plastic model of the pelvis and/or femur can be constructed in order to complete a rehearsal procedure, which may be particularly helpful for those cases involving osteotomies. The literature on the use of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty in patients with DDH demonstrates improved component positioning in comparison to navigated as well as manual methods; however, studies with long-term follow-up in this patient population are lacking.

Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Update on Navigation, Robotics, and Contemporary Advancements.

While total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains effective for improvement of pain and function in patients with osteoarthritis and avascular necrosis, there remain areas of continued pursuit of excellence, including decreasing rates of dislocation, leg length discrepancy, implant loosening, and infection. This review article covers several bearing surfaces and articulations, computer-assisted navigation and robotic technology, and minimally invasive surgical approaches that have sought to improve such outcomes. Perhaps the most significant improvement to THA implant longevity has been the broad adoption of highly cross-linked polyethylene, with low wear rates. Similarly, navigation and robotic technology has proven to more reproducibly achieve intraoperative component positioning, which has demonstrated clinical benefit with decreased risk of dislocation in a number of studies. Given the projected increase in THA over the coming decades, continued investigation of effective incorporation of technology, soft tissue-sparing approaches, and durable implants is imperative to continued pursuit of improved outcomes in THA.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

Survivorship and Clinical Outcomes of Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Performed in Patients 35 Years of Age and Younger.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) for patients aged ≤35 years are rare but necessary for patients who have diseases such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis, osteonecrosis, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis. Few studies have examined the 10-year and 20-year survivorship and clinical outcomes of TKAs for young patients. METHODS: A retrospective registry review identified 185 TKAs in 119 patients aged ≤ 35 years performed between 1985 and 2010 at a single institution. The primary outcome was implant survivorship free of revision. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at 2 time points: 2011 to 2012 and 2018 to 2019. The average age was 26 years (range, 12 to 35). Mean follow-up was 17 years (range, 8 to 33). RESULTS: Survivorship decreased from 84% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79 to 90) at 5 years to 70% (95% CI: 64 to 77) at 10 years and to 37% (95% CI: 29 to 45) at 20 years. The most common reasons for revision were aseptic loosening (6%) and infection (4%). Risk factors for revision included increasing age at time of surgery (Hazards Ratio [HR] 1.3, P = .01) and use of constrained (HR 1.7, P = .05) or hinged prostheses (HR 4.3, P = .02). There were 86% of patients reporting that their surgery resulted in "a great improvement" or better. CONCLUSION: Survivorship of TKAs in young patients is less favorable than expected. However, for the patients who responded to our surveys, TKA demonstrated substantial pain relief and improvement in function at 17-year follow-up. Revision risk increased with older age and higher levels of constraint.

Hemostatic Agents in Orthopedic Surgery.

Controlling blood loss is a crucial aspect of orthopedic surgery. Hemostatic agents can be used intraoperatively in combination with antifibrinolytics as part of an overall strategy to limit blood loss. Several new hemostatic agents have recently come to the market designed specifically for vascular surgery but have found uses in other surgical fields, including orthopedics. This article reviews the mechanisms of action and best uses of various mechanical hemostats, active hemostats, flowable hemostats, and fibrin sealants for achieving hemostasis in orthopedic surgery. Mechanical and active hemostats have been reported to successfully decrease blood loss from cancellous bone, capillaries, and venules. Flowable hemostats are generally favorable for use in small spaces where the swelling capabilities of mechanical and active hemostats can be detrimental to surrounding structures. Sealants are best used for closing defects in tissues.

Outcomes After Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty From a Specific, Now-Recalled Implant System.

BACKGROUND: A specific total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implant system was recently recalled for high incidence of early polymeric wear and osteolysis. We analyzed the early outcomes of aseptic revision with these implants. METHODS: We identified 202 aseptic revision TKAs of this implant system performed at a single institution between 2010 and 2020. Revision indications included aseptic loosening (n = 120), instability (n = 55), and polymeric wear/osteolysis (n = 27). Components were revised in 145 cases (72%) and isolated polyethylene insert exchange occurred in 57 cases (28%). Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses were used to determine survivorship free from all-cause rerevision and rerevision risk factors. RESULTS: At 2 and 5 years, survivorship free from all-cause rerevision was 89 and 76% in the polyethylene exchange cohort versus 92 and 84% in the component revision cohort (P = .5). At 2 and 5 years, survivorship in revision with components from the same manufacturer was 89 and 80% compared to 95 and 86% in revision with components from a different manufacturer (P = .2). Among re-revisions (n = 30), cones (37%), sleeves (7%), hinge/distal femoral replacement implants were frequently used (13%). Men had increased risk for rerevision (hazard ratio = 2.3, P = .04). CONCLUSION: In this series of aseptic revision TKAs performed on a now-recalled implant system, survivorship free from rerevision was lower than expected when components from the same manufacturer were utilized, but comparable to contemporary reports when both the components were revised with an alternative implant system. Metaphyseal fixation with cones and sleeves as well as highly constrained implants was frequently utilized at time of rerevision TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Wound Complications Are Affected by Different Skin Closure Methods in Primary Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on optimal skin closure and dressing strategies to reduce early wound complication rates after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: All 13,271 patients at low risk for wound complications undergoing primary, unilateral THA (7,816), and TKA (5,455) for idiopathic osteoarthritis at our institution between August 2016 and July 2021 were identified. Skin closure, dressing type, and postoperative events related to wound complications were recorded during the first 30 postoperative days. RESULTS: The need for unscheduled office visits to address wound complications was more frequent after TKA than THA (2.74 versus 1.78%, P < .001), and after direct anterior versus posterior approach THA (2.94 versus 1.39%, P < .001). Patients who developed a wound complication, had a mean of 2.9 additional office visits. Compared to the use of topical adhesives, skin closure with staples had the highest risk of wound complications (odds ratio 1.8 [1.07-3.11], P = .028). Topical adhesives with polyester mesh had higher rates of allergic contact dermatitis than topical adhesives without mesh (1.4 versus 0.5%, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Wound complications after primary THA and TKA were often self-limited but increased burden on the patient, surgeon, and care team. These data, which suggest different rates of certain complications with different skin closure strategies, can inform a surgeon on optimal closure methods in their practice. Adoption of the skin closure technique with the lowest risk of complications in our hospital would conservatively result in a reduction of 95 unscheduled office visits and save a projected $585,678 annually.

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Patients Have Lower Joint Awareness and Higher Function at 5 Years Compared to Total Knee Arthroplasties: A Matched Comparison.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative outcomes at minimum 5-year follow-up in patients following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared to a matched cohort of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. METHODS: Patients who had primarily medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) who met criteria for medial UKA underwent TKA or medial UKA between 2014 and 2015 at a single institution, matched for age, sex, and body mass index. There were 127 UKAs in 120 patients and 118 TKAs in 116 patients included with minimum 5-year follow-up (range, 6 to 8). Mean age was 69 years (range, 59 to 79) and 71 years (range, 62 to 80) in the UKA and TKA groups, respectively (P = .049). RESULTS: Patients who underwent UKA had significantly higher mean (±SD) Forgotten Joint Scores (87 ± 20 versus 59 ± 34, P < .001); higher Knee Society Scores (88 ± 14 versus 75 ± 21, P < .001); and lower Numeric Pain Rating Scores (0.8 ± 1.6 versus 1.9 ± 2.2, P < .001). Survivorship free from all-cause revision was 96% (95% CI = 93%-99%) and 99% (95% CI = 97%-100%) at 5 years for TKA and UKA, respectively (P = .52). There were 8 both component revisions in the TKA group within 5 years from the date of surgery and 2 UKA conversions to TKA after 5-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Patients who have medial compartment OA and underwent UKA had significantly lower joint awareness, decreased pain, improved function, and higher satisfaction compared to matched TKA patients at minimum 5-year follow-up while maintaining excellent survivorship.

History of COVID-19 infection is not associated with increased D-dimer levels and risk of deep-vein thrombosis in total joint arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: In the acute phase of COVID-19, elevated D-dimer levels indicate a hypercoagulable state putting the patients at increased risk for venous thromboembolic disease (VTE). It is unclear, if prior COVID-19 disease increases the risk for VTE after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and if D-dimer levels can be used to identify patients at risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: D-Dimer levels of 313 consecutive SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive and 2,053 -negative patients undergoing TJA between 05/20 and 12/20 were evaluated. D-Dimer levels were divided into three groups: < 200 ng/ml, 200-400 ng/ml, and > 400 ng/ml D-dimer units (DDU). 277 SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive patients underwent a Doppler ultrasound to rule out deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) 4-6 weeks after TJA. RESULTS: D-Dimer levels did not differ significantly between SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive and -negative patients (p value 0.53). Among SARS-CoV-2 IgG-negative patients, 1687 (82.17%) had D-dimer levels < 200 ng/ml, 256 (12.47%) between 200 and 400 ng/ml, and 110 (5.36%) > 400 ng/ml. Of the SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive patients, 257 (83.71%) had D-dimer levels < 200 ng/ml, 34 (11.07%) between 200 and 400 ng/ml, and 16 (5.21%) > 400 ng/ml. A postoperative DVT was detected in nine patients (2.9%) in the SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive group and a PE in one patient (0.3%). 7/229 patients with < 200 ng/ml (3.1%), 1/28 patients (3.6%) with 200-400 ng/ml and 1/9 patients (11.1%) with D-dimer levels > 400 ng/ml had a DVT or PE (p = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this investigation suggest there is no difference in D-dimer levels between SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive and -negative patients undergoing TJA. Although there is a trend for increased VTE rates with increased D-dimer levels, routine D-dimer testing is not recommended based on the current data. SARS-CoV-2 IgG-positive patients have a low risk of VTE in the current study.