Incidence and reasons for nonrevision reoperation after total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: A dramatic increase in the demand for TKA is expected. The current burden of revision TKA is well known but the incidence and etiology of nonrevision reoperations after primary TKA is not. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined the rate, reason, timing, and predictors of nonrevision reoperation after TKA. METHODS: Using our institutional joint arthroplasty database, we identified 10,188 TKA performed on 7,613 patients between April 2000 and March 2008. A nonrevision reoperation was defined as any procedure requiring anesthetic in which components with bony interfaces were not removed or exchanged. Procedures after revision TKA were excluded. Potential risk factors investigated included age, gender, laterality, and simultaneous bilateral versus staged bilateral versus unilateral TKA. The minimum followup was 1 year (median, 4.1 years; range, 1.1 to 9.1 years). RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-three patients of 7,613 (4.6%) underwent 434 nonrevision reoperations on 384 of 10,188 (3.8%) knees. The most common indication for nonrevision reoperation was stiffness (58%; 252 of 434), followed by patellar clunk (12%; 53), infection (12%; 52), wound revision (6%; 26), hematoma (4.4%; 19), among others. The median time to reoperation was 74.5 days (range, 1-3058 days) but varied widely. Younger patients and those with unilateral TKA were more likely to have a nonrevision reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of nonrevision reoperations are performed for stiffness. Patellar clunk and infection also result in a large number of nonrevision reoperations. In weighing the future economic and workforce burden of TKA, nonrevision reoperations need to be acknowledged, and preventive measures need to be implemented. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A prospective evaluation of 2 different pain management protocols for total hip arthroplasty.

Pain management after total hip arthroplasty has improved dramatically in the past decade. However, most protocols use opioid medications for pain control. In the current study, 100 patients were prospectively selected to receive a traditional narcotic-based patient-controlled analgesia protocol or a nonnarcotic oral protocol for pain management after primary total hip arthroplasty. Therapy programs were similar for both groups. Postoperatively, patients were followed daily for opioid use, medication adverse effects, pain control, and overall satisfaction. The nonnarcotic oral group showed lower mean pain scores during the first 24 hours after surgery. The satisfaction rate was high in both groups. Both protocols provided adequate pain control after total hip arthroplasty; the nonnarcotic pain management protocol resulted in significantly decreased opioid consumption and fewer adverse effects.

Aggressive Anticoagulation after TJA: an evaluation of the ACCP guidelines for Thromboprophylaxis.

Thromboembolic disease is common after orthopaedic surgery. In an effort to minimize the risk of pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis (DVT), anticoagulation administration has become a common practice. Both the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) have published guidelines recommending antithrombotic protocols. The ACCP guidelines are excessive and do not adequately evaluate the complications resulting from aggressive anticoagulation. These complications include, but are not limited to, major and minor bleeding events, thrombocytopenia, subsequent periprosthetic infection, and complications with spinal or epidural anesthesia. The AAOS guidelines generated by a group of orthopedic surgeons evaluate the efficacy of various agents in preventing pulmonary embolus and not distal DVT. They differ from the AACP guidelines in some aspects. The AAOS guidelines accept the use of aspirin combined with mechanical compression devices, and low-dose warfarin therapy. We believe that the AAOS guidelines for thromboprophylaxis take into account all risks associated with anticoagulation therapy and may prove to be a safer option for our patients.