Risk Versus Reward - Hospitals Incentivized More than Surgeons to Care for Riskier Arthroplasty Patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between risk and reimbursement for both surgeons and hospitals among Medicare patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). METHODS: The "2021-Medicare-Physician-and-Other-Provider" and "2021-Medicare-Inpatient-Hospitals" files were utilized. Patient comorbidity profiles were collected, including the mean patient-hierarchal-condition-category (HCC) risk score, which is a standardized metric accounting for comorbidities. Surgeon data included all primary TJA procedures (inpatient and outpatient) billed to Medicare in 2021, while hospital data included all inpatient episodes of primary TJA billed to Medicare in 2021. Surgeon and hospital reimbursements were collected. All episodes were split into a "sicker-cohort" with an HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater and a "healthier-cohort" with HCC risk scores less than 1.5. Variables were compared across cohorts. RESULTS: In 2021, 386,355 primary total hip and knee arthroplasty procedures were billed to Medicare and were included. The mean surgeon reimbursement among the sicker cohort was $1,021.91, which was less than for the healthier cohort of $1,060.13 (P < 0.001). Meanwhile, for the hospital analysis, 112,012 Medicare patients were admitted as inpatients for primary TJA in 2021 and included. The mean reimbursement to hospitals was significantly greater for the sicker cohort at $13,950.66, compared to the healthier cohort of $8,430.46. For both the surgeon and hospital analyses, the sicker patient cohorts had a significantly higher rate of all comorbidities assessed (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that mean surgeon reimbursement was lower for primary TJA among sicker patients in comparison to their healthier counterparts, while hospital reimbursement was higher for sicker patients. This represents a discrepancy in the incentivization of care for complex patients, as hospitals receive increased remuneration for taking on extra risk, while surgeons get paid less on average for performing TJA on sicker patients. Such data should inform future policy to assure continued access to arthroplasty care among complex patients.

Rheumatoid Arthritis Is Not a Contraindication to Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has historically been considered a contraindication for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, the widespread use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs has substantially improved the management of RA and prevented disease progression. The objective of this study was to ascertain whether RA impacts UKA revision-free survivorship. METHODS: Patients undergoing UKA from 2010 to 2021 were identified in an administrative claims database (n = 105,937) using Current Procedural Terminology code 27446. All patients who underwent UKA who had a diagnosis of RA with a minimum of 2-year follow-up (n = 1,422) were propensity score matched based on age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index to those who did not have RA (n = 1,422). Laterality was identified using the 10th Revision of International Classification of Diseases codes. The primary outcome was ipsilateral revision to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) within 2 years, and the secondary outcome was ipsilateral revision at any time. RESULTS: Among the 1,422 patients who had a UKA and a diagnosis of RA, 37 patients (2.6%) underwent conversion to TKA within 2 years, and 48 patients (3.4%) underwent conversion to TKA at any point. In comparison, 28 patients (2.0%) in the propensity-matched control group underwent conversion to TKA within 2 years, and 40 patients (2.8%) underwent conversion to TKA at any point. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in conversion to TKA between patients who had and did not have RA, either within 2 years (P = .31) or anytime (P = .45). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had RA and underwent UKA did not have an increased risk of revision to TKA compared to those who did not have RA. This may indicate that modern management of RA could allow for expanded UKA indications for RA patients.

Posteromedial Periarticular Injection in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Cadaveric Study.

Achieving optimal pain control in total knee arthroplasty has improved with the use of regional anesthesia and periarticular injections (PAIs). When performing a PAI, the relative location of the anesthetic spread is not well defined in comparison with an adductor canal block (ACB). In this study, our aim was to evaluate the location of posteromedial PAI spread compared with a surgeon administered ACB. One PAI and one surgeon-administered ACB were performed in the contralateral limbs of four human cadavers. The injectate was composed of methylene blue dye to visually inspect the dye spread from the tip of the needle. Dissections were performed on each cadaver to quantify the dye spread from the tip of the needle and compare the location of the dye spread. Dye spread location was characterized as either entering the adductor canal or including the posterior capsule. The mean distance of dye spread from the needle tip to the proximal most aspect of the dyed tissue was 10.125 cm in the ACB group compared with 6.5 cm in the posteromedial PAI group. In the ACB group, 4 of 4 injections were present in the adductor canal block group compared with 3 of 4 in the posteromedial PAI group. The posteromedial PAI group also had 3 of 4 injections involve the area around the posterior capsule compared with 0 of 4 in the ACB group. Posteromedial PAI appears to provide local delivery to both the adductor canal and the posterior capsule. Intraoperative, surgeon-administered ACB reliably delivers injectate to the adductor canal only but may allow for more proximal dye spread. Posteromedial PAI may provide a benefit in delivering injectate to the posterior capsule in addition to the ACB. Additional clinical studies are necessary to determine the clinical effects of this finding.

Principles of mechanical and chemical debridement with implant retention.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most common causes of early revision for total hip and knee arthroplasty. Mechanical and chemical debridement typically referred to as debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) can be a successful technique to eradicate PJI in acute postoperative or acute hematogenous infections. This review will focus specifically on the indications, techniques, and outcomes of DAIR. DISCUSSION: The success of mechanical and chemical debridement, or a DAIR operation, is reliant on a combination of appropriate patient selection and meticulous technique. There are many technical considerations to take into consideration. One of the most important factors in the success of the DAIR procedure is the adequacy of mechanical debridement. Techniques are surgeon-specific and perhaps contribute to the large variability in the literature on the success of DAIR. Factors that have been shown to be associated with success include the exchange of modular components, performing the procedure within seven days or less of symptom onset, and possibly adjunctive rifampin or fluoroquinolone therapy, though this remains controversial. Factors that have been associated with failure include rheumatoid arthritis, age greater than 80 years, male sex, chronic renal failure, liver cirrhosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: DAIR is an effective treatment option for the management of an acute postoperative or hematogenous PJI in the appropriately selected patient with well-fixed implants.

Increased Risk of Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve Injury in Patients With Previous Hip Arthroscopy Who Underwent a Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Purpose: To evaluate the rates of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) injury in patients who underwent a direct anterior approach (DAA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) with and without previous hip arthroscopy. Methods: We retrospectively investigated consecutive DAA THAs performed by a single surgeon. These cases were grouped into patients with and without a history of previous ipsilateral hip arthroscopy. LFCN sensation was assessed during the initial follow-up (6 weeks) and 1-year (or most recent) follow-up visits. The incidence and character of LFCN injury was compared between the 2 groups. Results: In total, 166 patients underwent a DAA THA with no previous hip arthroscopy, and 13 had a history of previous arthroscopy. Of the 179 total patients who underwent THA, 77 experienced some form of LFCN injury at initial follow-up (43%). The rate of injury for the cohort with no previous arthroscopy was 39% (n = 65/166) on initial follow-up, whereas the rate of injury for the cohort with a history of previous ipsilateral arthroscopy was 92% (n =12/13) on initial follow-up (P < .001). In addition, although the difference was not significant, 28% (n = 46/166) of the group without history of previous arthroscopy and 69% (n = 9/13) of the group with a history of previous arthroscopy had continued symptoms of LFCN injury at most recent follow-up. Conclusions: In this study, patients who underwent hip arthroscopy before an ipsilateral DAA THA were at increased risk of LFCN injury compared with patients who underwent a DAA THA without a previous hip arthroscopy. At final follow-up of patients with initial LFCN injury, symptoms resolved in 29% (n = 19/65) of patients with no previous hip arthroscopy and 25% (n = 3/12) of patients with previous hip arthroscopy. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Changes Over a Decade in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

Background: When used appropriately, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) provides a powerful tool for identifying meaningful improvements brought about by a given treatment, offering more clinically relevant information than frequentist statistical analysis. However, recent studies have shown inconsistent derivation methods and use of MCIDs. The goal of this study was to report the rate of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and MCIDs use in the literature and assess how this rate has changed over time. Methods: All articles published in 2010 and 2020 reporting on total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty in The Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and The Journal of Arthroplasty were reviewed. In each reviewed article, every reported PROM and, if present, its corresponding MCID was recorded. These data were used to calculate the rate of reporting of each PROM and MCID. Results: While the total number of articles on total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty reporting PROMs increased over time, the proportion of articles reporting PROMs decreased from 49.8% (131/263) in 2010 to 35.5% (194/546) in 2020 (P = .011). Of these articles that report PROMs, the proportion of articles reporting any MCID increased from 2.3% (3/131) in 2010 to 16.5% (32/194) in 2020 (P = .002). Conclusions: The rate of reporting of MCIDs among articles relating to total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty that report PROMs has increased significantly between 2010 and 2020 but remains low. Continued emphasis on appropriate inclusion and value of MCIDs when PROMS are reported in clinical outcomes studies is needed.

The Current Relationship Between Surgeon Reimbursement and Patient Complexity in Arthroplasty-A Risk-Payment Analysis of All Primary Joint Replacements Billed to Medicare in 2019.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess surgeon reimbursement among total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients who had differing risk profiles within the Medicare population. METHODS: The "2019 Medicare Physician and Other Provider" file was utilized. In 2019, 441,584 primary total hip and knee arthroplasty procedures were billed to Medicare Part B. All episodes were included. Patient demographics and comorbidity profiles were collected for all patients. Additionally, mean patient hierarchal condition category (HCC) risk scores and physician reimbursements were collected. All procedure episodes were split into 2 cohorts; those with an HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater, and those with patient HCC risk scores less than 1.5. Variables were averaged for each cohort and compared. RESULTS: The mean reimbursement across all procedures was $1,068.03. For the sicker patient cohort with a mean HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater, there was a significantly higher rate of all comorbidities compared to the cohort with HCC risk score under 1.5. The mean payment across the sicker cohort was $1,059.21, while the mean payment among the cohort with HCC risk score under 1.5 was 1,073.32 (P = .032). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that for Medicare patients undergoing primary TJA in 2019, the mean surgeon reimbursement was lower for primary TJA among sick patients in comparison to their healthier counterparts, although it is difficult to ascertain the impact of this discrepancy. As alternative payment models continue to undergo evaluation and development, these data will be important for the potential advancement of more equitable reimbursement models in arthroplasty care, specifically regarding surgeon reimbursement and possible risk adjustment within such models.

Routine Type and Screens Are Unnecessary in Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty: Follow-up After a Change in Practice.

Background: Routine type and screens (T&S) prior to total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are common despite low transfusion rates. Our institution implemented a practice change after previously demonstrating a transfusion rate of 1.06%. The purpose of this study is to present the follow-up data 1 year after the practice change of discontinuing routine T&S orders in primary total joint arthroplasty. Methods: A practice change was implemented discontinuing routine T&S orders prior to elective primary total joint arthroplasties. We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data on preoperative T&S, hemoglobin values, transfusion rates, bleeding disorders, and anticoagulation status. Results: A total of 663 patients were included in the study (273 THAs and 390 TKAs). The cumulative transfusion rate was 0.75. No patients received an intraoperative transfusion. Three patients (1.1%) received a postoperative transfusion after THA, and 3 patients (0.5%) received a transfusion after TKA. The mean preoperative hemoglobin in the transfused patients was 12.1 g/dL. Thirteen patients underwent a preoperative T&S (2.0%), and only 2 required transfusion (15.4%). Only 1 patient who required transfusion was on preoperative anticoagulation, and no patients with bleeding disorders required transfusions. Discontinuing routine T&S resulted in an estimated cost savings of $124,325.50. Conclusions: Discontinuation of routine T&S did not result in any adverse consequences. If required, T&S can safely be performed intraoperatively or postoperatively. Surgeons may consider obtaining a T&S if their preoperative hemoglobin is less than 11-12 g/dL or if significant blood loss is expected in a complex primary total joint arthroplasty.

Discordance Abounds in Minimum Clinically Important Differences in THA: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is intended to detect a change in a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) large enough for a patient to appreciate. Their growing use in orthopaedic research stems from the necessity to identify a metric, other than the p value, to better assess the effect size of an outcome. Yet, given that MCIDs are population-specific and that there are multiple calculation methods, there is concern about inconsistencies. Given the increasing use of MCIDs in total hip arthroplasty (THA) research, a systematic review of calculated MCID values and their respective ranges, as well as an assessment of their applications, is important to guide and encourage their use as a critical measure of effect size in THA outcomes research. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We systematically reviewed MCID calculations and reporting in current THA research to answer the following: (1) What are the most-reported PROM MCIDs in THA, and what is their range of values? (2) What proportion of studies report anchor-based versus distribution-based MCID values? (3) What are the most common methods by which anchor-based MCID values are derived? (4) What are the most common derivation methods for distribution-based MCID values? (5) How do the reported medians and corresponding ranges compare between calculation methods for each PROM? METHODS: The EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were systematically reviewed from inception through March 2022 for THA studies reporting an MCID value for any PROMs. Two independent authors reviewed articles for inclusion. All articles calculating new PROM MCID scores after primary THA were included for data extraction and analysis. MCID values for each PROM, MCID calculation method, number of patients, and study demographics were extracted from each article. In total, 30 articles were included. There were 45 unique PROMs for which 242 MCIDs were reported. These studies had a total of 1,000,874 patients with a median age of 64 years and median BMI of 28.7 kg/m 2 . Women made up 55% of patients in the total study population, and the median follow-up period was 12 months (range 0 to 77 months). The overall risk of bias was assessed as moderate using the modified Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies criteria for comparative studies (the mean score for comparative papers in this review was 18 of 24, with higher scores representing better study quality) and noncomparative studies (for these, the mean score was 10 of a possible 16 points, with higher scores representing higher study quality). Calculated values were classified as anchor-based, distribution-based, or not reported. MCID values for each PROM, MCID calculation method, number of patients, and study demographics were extracted from each study. Anchor-based and distribution-based MCIDs were compared for each unique PROM using a Wilcoxon rank sum test, given the non-normal distribution of values. RESULTS: The Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Score (HOOS) Pain and Quality of Life subscore MCIDs were the most frequently reported, comprising 12% (29 of 242), 8% (20 of 242), and 8% (20 of 242), respectively. The EuroQol VAS (EQ-VAS) was the next-most frequently reported (7% [17 of 242]) followed by the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D) (7% [16 of 242]). The median anchor-based value for the OHS was 9 (IQR 8 to 11), while the median distribution-based value was 6 (IQR 5 to 6). The median anchor-based MCID values for HOOS Pain and Quality of Life were 33 (IQR 28 to 35) and 25 (14 to 27), respectively; the median distribution-based values were 10 (IQR 9 to 10) and 13 (IQR 10 to 14), respectively. Thirty percent (nine of 30) of studies used an anchor-based method to calculate a new MCID, while 40% (12 of 30) used a distribution-based technique. Thirty percent of studies (nine of 30) calculated MCID values using both methods. For studies reporting an anchor-based calculation method, a question assessing pain relief, satisfaction, or quality of life on a five-point Likert scale was the most commonly used anchor (30% [eight of 27]), followed by a receiver operating characteristic curve estimation (22% [six of 27]). For studies using distribution-based calculations, the most common method was one-half the standard deviation of the difference between preoperative and postoperative PROM scores (46% [12 of 26]). Most reported median MCID values (nine of 14) did not differ by calculation method for each unique PROM (p > 0.05). The OHS, HOOS JR, and HOOS Function, Symptoms, and Activities of Daily Living subscores all varied by calculation method, because each anchor-based value was larger than its respective distribution-based value. CONCLUSION: We found that MCIDs do not vary very much by calculation method across most outcome measurement tools. Additionally, there are consistencies in MCID calculation methods, because most authors used an anchor question with a Likert scale for the anchor-based approach or used one-half the standard deviation of preoperative and postoperative PROM score differences for the distribution-based approach. For some of the most frequently reported MCIDs, however, anchor-based values tend to be larger than distribution-based values for their respective PROMs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We recommend using a 9-point increase as the MCID for the OHS, consistent with the median reported anchor-based value derived from several high-quality studies with large patient groups that used anchor-based approaches for MCID calculations, which we believe are most appropriate for most applications in clinical research. Likewise, we recommend using the anchor-based 33-point and 25-point MCIDs for the HOOS Pain and Quality of Life subscores, respectively. We encourage using anchor-based MCID values of WOMAC Pain, Function, and Stiffness subscores, which were 29, 26, and 30, respectively.

What are the 2-year survivorship outcomes of custom hemipelvis reconstruction after hemipelvectomy and revision arthroplasty? The evolution of a custom ilium "monoflange".

BACKGROUND: Innovations in machined and three-dimensionally (3D) printed implant technology have allowed for customized complex pelvic reconstructions. We sought to determine the survivorship of custom hemipelvis reconstruction using ilium-only fixation at a minimum 2-year follow-up, their modes of failure, and the postoperative complications resulting from the procedure. METHODS: A retrospective review identified 12 consecutive patients treated with custom hemipelvis reconstruction. Indications for surgery were bone tumor requiring internal hemipelvectomy (four patients) or multiply revised, failed hip arthroplasty with massive bone loss (eight patients). All patients had a minimum of 2-year follow-up with a mean of 60.5 months. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was determined for all patients. Postoperative complications and reoperations were categorized for all patients. RESULTS: At a mean of 60.5 months, 11 of 12 patients had retained their custom implant (92% survivorship). One implant was removed as a result of an acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). There were no cases of aseptic loosening. Seven of 12 patients required reoperation (three PJI; two dislocations; two superficial wound complications), with five patients going on to reoperation-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Custom hemipelvis reconstruction utilizing an ilium monoflange provides durable short-term fixation at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Reoperation for infection and dislocation is common.

There are Considerable Inconsistencies Among Minimum Clinically Important Differences in TKA: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are frequently used to assess the impact of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on patients. However, mere statistical comparison of PROMs is not sufficient to assess the value of TKA to the patient, especially given the risk profile of arthroplasty. Evaluation of treatment effect sizes is important to support the use of an intervention; this is often quantified with the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). MCIDs are unique to specific PROMs, as they vary by calculation methodology and study population. Therefore, a systematic review of calculated MCID values, their respective ranges, and assessment of their applications is important to guide and encourage their use as a critical measure of effect size in TKA outcomes research. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review of MCID calculations and reporting in primary TKA, we asked: (1) What are the most frequently reported PROM MCIDs and their reported ranges in TKA? (2) What proportion of studies report distribution- versus anchor-based MCID values? (3) What are the most common methods by which these MCID values are derived for anchor-based values? (4) What are the most common derivation methods for distribution-based values? (5) How do the reported medians and corresponding interquartile ranges (IQR) compare between calculation methods for each PROM? METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases from inception through March 2022 for TKA articles reporting an MCID value for any PROMs. Two independent reviewers screened articles for eligibility, including any article that calculated new MCID values for PROMs after primary TKA, and extracted these data for analysis. Overall, 576 articles were identified, 38 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies had a total of 710,128 patients with a median age of 67.7 years and median BMI of 30.9 kg/m 2 . Women made up more than 50% of patients in most studies, and the median follow-up period was 17 months (range 0.25 to 72 months). The overall risk of bias was assessed as moderate using the Jadad criteria for one randomized controlled trial (3 of 5 ideal global score) and the modified Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies criteria for comparative studies (mean 17.2 ± 1.8) and noncomparative studies (mean 9.6 ± 1.3). There were 49 unique PROMs for which 233 MCIDs were reported. Calculated values were classified as anchor-based, distribution-based, or not reported. MCID values for each PROM, MCID calculation method, number of patients, and study demographics were extracted from each study. Anchor-based and distribution-based MCIDs were compared for each unique PROM using a Wilcoxon rank sum test given non-normal distribution of values. RESULTS: The WOMAC Function and Pain subscores were the most frequently reported MCID value, comprising 9% (22 of 233) and 9% (22 of 233), respectively. The composite Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was the next most frequently reported (9% [21 of 233]), followed by the WOMAC composite score (6% [13 of 233]). The median anchor-based values for WOMAC Function and Pain subscores were 23 (IQR 16 to 33) and 25 (IQR 14 to 31), while the median distribution-based values were 11 (IQR 10.8 to 11) and 22 (IQR 17 to 23), respectively. The median anchor-based MCID value for the OKS was 6 (IQR 4 to 7), while the distribution-based value was 7 (IQR 5 to 10). Thirty-nine percent (15 of 38) used an anchor-based method to calculate a new MCID, while 32% (12 of 38) used a distribution-based technique. Twenty-nine percent of studies (11 of 38) calculated MCID values using both methods. For studies reporting an anchor-based calculation method, a question assessing patient satisfaction, pain relief, or quality of life along a five-point Likert scale was the most commonly used anchor (40% [16 of 40]), followed by a receiver operating characteristic curve estimation (25% [10 of 40]). For studies using distribution-based calculations, all articles used a measure of study population variance in their derivation of the MCID, with the most common method reported as one-half the standard deviation of the difference between preoperative and postoperative PROM scores (45% [14 of 31]). Most reported median MCID values (15 of 19) did not differ by calculation method for each unique PROM (p > 0.05) apart from the WOMAC Function component score and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain and Activities of Daily Living subscores. CONCLUSION: Despite variability of MCIDs for each PROM, there is consistency in the methodology by which MCID values have been derived in published studies. Additionally, there is a consensus about MCID values regardless of calculation method across most of the PROMs we evaluated. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given their importance to treatment selection and patient safety, authors and journals should report MCID values with greater consistency. We recommend using a 7-point increase as the MCID for the OKS, consistent with the median reported anchor-based value derived from several high-quality studies with large patient groups that used anchor-based approaches for MCID calculation, which we believe are most appropriate for most applications in clinical research. Likewise, we recommend using a 10-point to 15-point increase for the MCID of composite WOMAC, as the median value was 12 (IQR 10 to 17) with no difference between calculation methods. We recommend use of median reported values for WOMAC function and pain subscores: 21 (IQR 15 to 33) and 23 (IQR 13 to 29), respectively.

Abnormal Spinopelvic Motion and Spine Deformity are Associated With Native Femoral Retroversion in the Setting of Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: The effect of spinopelvic pathology on femoral version is unclear. This study investigated variability in native femoral anteversion in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and its relationship to the patient's underlying spinopelvic pattern. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to include in the study all patients undergoing robot-assisted THA over a 3-year period. Native femoral version was measured for each patient using a preoperative computed tomography scan and categorized as excessive, normal, or retroverted. Additionally, a subset analysis was performed for all patients with sit-to-stand dynamic pelvic radiographs available, and cases were classified by spinopelvic pattern. Results: A total of 119 patients were included in the study with a mean age of 68.6 years; 61 (51%) were female. The median femoral anteversion for the entire study group was 6.0° (-32° to 40°, interquartile range 13.5°). Eleven patients (9.2%) had excessive femoral anteversion, 54 of the 119 (45.4%) had normal femoral version, and 54 of the 119 (45.4%) had native retroversion. Forty-two patients (35.3%) had sit-to-stand radiographs available and were subclassified by femoral version type and spinopelvic parameters. Welch's analysis of variance demonstrated a significant difference in femoral version among spinopelvic patterns (F = 7.826, P = .003), with Games-Howell post hoc analysis showing increased retroversion in deformity-stiff patients compared to deformity-normal mobility patients (P = .003). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that native femoral retroversion is present in a significant number of patients undergoing THA and is more common in patients with stiff spine deformities. Based on this observation, currently available spinopelvic classification systems should be modified to account for native femoral version.

Clinical outcomes and survivorship of cementless triathlon total knee arthroplasties: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, cementless total knee arthroplasty has demonstrated improved outcomes and survivorship due to advances in technologies of implant design, manufacturing capabilities, and biomaterials. Due to increasing interest in cementless implant design for TKA, our aim was to perform a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the clinical outcomes and revision rates of the Triathlon Total Knee system over the past decade. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted following PRISMA guidelines for patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty with cementless Triathalon Total Knee System implants. Patients had a minimum of two-year follow-up and data included clinical outcome scores and survivorship data. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included in the final analysis. The survivability of the Stryker Triathlon TKA due to all causes was 98.7%, with an aseptic survivability of 99.2%. The overall revision incidence per 1,000 person-years was 3.4. Re-revision incidence per 1,000 person-years was 2.2 for infection, and 1.3 for aseptic loosening. The average KSS for pain was 92.2 and the average KSS for function was 82.7. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes and survivorship at a mean time of 3.8 years. Additional research is necessary to examine the long-term success of the Stryker Triathlon TKA and the use of cementless TKAs in obese and younger populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Patient Interest in Robotic Total Joint Arthroplasty Is Exponential: A 10-Year Google Trends Analysis.

Background: The use of robotics in arthroplasty continues to increase. Patient demand, patient expectations, and patient-directed marketing by industry and care providers each likely contributes to its increasing popularity. Trends in patient interest have not been well described. We used the online Google Trends tool to analyze trends in national public interest toward robotic and nonrobotic arthroplasty between 2011 and 2021. Material and methods: Google Trends online was queried for search terms related to nonrobotic hip and knee arthroplasty in addition to robotic hip, robotic knee, and general robotic arthroplasty between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2021. Results: Google Trends Data demonstrated a significant linear increase in online searches related to nonrobotic total knee and hip arthroplasty. Online search volume for robotic hip arthroplasty was significant and linear, while that of robotic knee arthroplasty was significant and exponential. When combined, robotic joint arthroplasty demonstrated an exponential trend over the 10-year period. This increase was noted to be statistically significant when compared with nonrobotic arthroplasty search volume. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that public interest in robotic total joint arthroplasty has increased significantly from 2011 through 2020. When compared with online search volume for conventional arthroplasty, this increasing growth is statistically significant. Public interest in robotic arthroplasty is anticipated to continue to increase, and care providers should be aware of this trend that impacts patient perceptions and expectations. Despite significant growth in interest for robotic arthroplasty, there is incomplete evidence supporting its use over nonrobotic arthroplasty. Additional high-quality studies are needed to inform provider decision-making and appropriately guide public interest in robot-assisted arthroplasty.

Compartment Syndrome following Below-Knee Amputation.

In the setting of below-knee amputation, compartment syndrome is a rare complication. Early clinical symptoms of an acute compartment syndrome following below-knee amputation can mimic or be masked by postoperative pain management. We present the case of a 38-year-old male with a significant past medical history of Proteus syndrome who underwent an elective transtibial below-knee amputation. Following surgery, the patient had extensive postoperative pain and high pain medication requirements and returned to the operating room for irrigation and debridement due to suspicion of an infection. Upon return to the operating room to manage the infection, the necrotic tissue was discovered and removed which had developed due to a suspected missed acute compartment syndrome. The necrotic tissue secondary to the compartment syndrome subsequently resulted in infection. Multiple irrigation and debridement procedures were performed to further manage the infection, and ultimately, the patient was deemed stable for discharge. Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) following below-knee amputation (BKA) is a rarely documented but critical complication. This case describes the unique setting in which a compartment syndrome can be masked due to postoperative pain management and infection. Orthopedic surgeons should be aware of the varying risk factors and presentations of an acute compartment syndrome (ACS) as it can occur and is a devastating complication.

Antiseptic Irrigation Solutions Used in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Critical Analysis Review.

¼: There are limited data that directly compare the efficacy of antiseptic irrigation solutions used for the prevention and treatment of periprosthetic joint infections in orthopaedic procedures; there is a notable lack of prospective data. ¼: For prevention of periprosthetic joint infections, the strongest evidence supports the use of low-pressure povidone-iodine. ¼: For the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections, delivering multiple solutions sequentially may be beneficial.

What Is the Duration of Irrigation? An In Vitro Study of the Minimum Exposure Time to Eradicate Bacteria With Irrigation Solutions.

BACKGROUND: Antiseptic irrigation solutions are commonly used by arthroplasty surgeons to reduce intraoperative bacterial colonization with the goal of reducing postoperative infections in the setting of primary total joint arthroplasty. Currently, the minimum irrigation time to eliminate common microbes implicated in periprosthetic joint infection is unknown. We sought to determine the minimum effective exposure time required to prevent growth of Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, and Cutibacterium acnes with common antiseptic solutions. METHODS: S aureus, S epidermidis, and C acnes cultures were treated with povidone-iodine (0.35%), chlorhexidine (0.05%), sodium hypochlorite (0.5%), polyhexamethylene biguanide, and an acetic acid-based solution for 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 seconds in triplicate. Bacterial growth was quantified using the drop plate method. Failure to eliminate all bacteria was considered "not effective" at that time point. RESULTS: Povidone-iodine 0.35% (Betadine), sodium hypochlorite 0.5% (HySept), and acetic acid (Bactisure) eradicated all bacterial growth after 90 seconds of treatment, and as low as 15 seconds in S aureus and C acnes (Betadine) or S epidermidis (Bactisure). Polyhexamethylene biguanide (Prontosan) required 90 seconds for elimination of S aureus and S epidermidis, and 120 seconds for C acnes. Chlorhexidine 0.05% (Irrisept) did eliminate S epidermidis at 120 seconds but did not effectively eradicate S aureus or C acnes. CONCLUSION: All tested antiseptic solutions demonstrated successful eradication of all bacterial growth in under 2 minutes of treatment time except chlorhexidine. Povidone-iodine may require the shortest duration of treatment time to successfully eradicate common bacteria.

Hospital outcomes in pediatric patients with Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) undergoing orthopedic surgery: A 12-year analysis of national trends in surgical management and inpatient hospital outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of orthopedic disorders amongst patients with Prader-Willi Syndrome (PWS) is high when compared to the general pediatric population. The purpose of this retrospective study was to define the most commonly performed orthopedic procedures in pediatric patients with PWS and to characterize the peri-operative outcomes of these patients. METHODS: The Kids Inpatient Database (KID) was queried to collect data and identify all pediatric patients with PWS who underwent orthopedic procedures from 2001 to 2012. A total of 3684 patients with PWS were identified, 334 of who underwent an orthopedic procedure. Population demographics, comorbidities, and specific procedures undergone were defined. The incidences of postoperative complications and length of associated hospital stay were additionally evaluated. RESULTS: Mean age of patients in this sample was 10.33 years (SD 4.5). The most common comorbidities included obesity (18.1%), chronic pulmonary disease (14.1%), hypothyroidism (5.1%), hypertension (5.1%), and uncomplicated diabetes (4%). Common procedures were spinal fusion (165/334, 49%) and lower extremity procedures (50/334, 15%). Complications included acute blood loss anemia, device related complications, pneumonia, sepsis, and urinary tract infections. The overall complication rate was 35.6%. Average hospital lengths of stay for patients undergoing spinal fusion was 6.68 days (SD 4.13), lower extremity orthopedic procedure was 5.65 days (SD 7.4), and all other orthopedic procedures was 7.74 days (SD 16.3). CONCLUSIONS: Orthopedic disorders are common in patients with PWS. Consequently, spinal fusions and lower extremity procedures are commonly performed in this patient population. Associated comorbid conditions may negatively impact surgical outcomes in these patients. This information should prove useful in the peri-operative management of patients with PWS undergoing orthopedic surgery and for shared decision making with families.

Surgical Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Pain in Arthroplasty Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: One occupational hazard inherent to total joint replacement surgeons is procedural-related musculoskeletal pain (MSP). The purpose of this study is to identify the prevalence of work-related MSP among arthroplasty surgeons and analyze associated behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs toward surgical ergonomics. METHODS: A survey was sent to members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons. The survey included 3 main sections: demographics, symptoms by body part, and attitudes/beliefs/behaviors regarding surgical ergonomics. Pain was reported using the Numeric Rating Scale (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain), and well-being was assessed using the Maslach Burnout Inventory. RESULTS: In total, 586 surgeons completed the survey: 96.1% male and 3.9% female. Most surgeons (96.5%) experience procedural-related MSP. Collectively, surgeons reported an average pain score of 3.7/10 (standard deviation ±1.95). Significant levels of MSP (≥5/10) were most common in the lower back (34.2%), hands (24.8%), and the neck (21.2%). There was a positive association among higher MSP and burnout (P < .001), callousness toward others (P = .005), and decreased overall happiness (P < .001). MSP was also found to have a significant impact on surgeon behavior including the degree of irritability (P < .001), alcohol intake (P < .001), and poor sleep patterns (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of MSP among arthroplasty surgeons is extremely high. This study demonstrates that MSP has a significant impact on career attitudes, lifestyle, and overall surgeon well-being. This study may also contribute to future work to prevent cumulative chronic ailments, disability, and lost productivity of arthroplasty surgeons through promotion of improved ergonomics and risk-reduction strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.