Safety of blood reinfusion drains after local infiltration analgesia in total joint replacement.

BACKGROUND: Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) is frequently administered to patient undergoing joint replacement surgical procedures. The aim of the present research was to verify the safety of collected shed blood to be reinfused postoperatively, by measuring levobupivacaine levels in drainage blood in patients undergoing LIA during knee replacement surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 24 patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and 12 scheduled for total hip arthroplasty (THA) who received intraoperative LIA were considered. Blood samples were collected from shed blood which was present in drainage 2 and 5 hours after surgery and serum was analysed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS: At 2 hours postoperatively, the median levobupivacaine serum concentration in the collected shed blood was 1.2 mg/L (SD: 4.2) for TKA and 17.13 mg/L (SD: 24.4) for THA. At 5 hours, levobupivacaine concentration was 1.84 mg/L (SD: 2.2) for TKA and 17.5 mg/L (SD: 25.2) for THA. Higher values of average serum levobupivacaine concentration were reported in drains collected from patients who had undergone THA compared to TKA (p<0.001). BMI significantly influenced levels of serum drug, that resulted to be higher in patients with BMI<25 (p= 0.01). CONCLUSION: Levobupivacaine from collected shed blood that would have been returned to the patient, was below toxicity level at 2 and 5 hours after LIA during total joint replacement. The average serum levobupivacaine concentration was found to be higher in drains taken from THA patients than TKA patients. Patients with lower BMI demonstrated the highest levels of levobupivacaine in shed blood and a lower blood volume needed for central nervous system toxicity. Therefore, in patients with a lower BMI undergoing THA, anaesthetic dosage should be reduced or autotransfusion should be avoided to prevent potential risks of toxicity.

One-Stage Tricompartmental Hypoallergenic UKA for Tricompartmental Osteoarthritis: A Case Report.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative and progressive joint disease. When all three compartments are involved, end-stage OA is treated with a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a primary treatment for isolated osteoarthritis. UKA has a quicker recovery time than TKA, as well as less morbidity and more tissue sparing. At the time of surgery, 17% of patients have a tricompartmental disease and most patients with a Kellegren-Lawrence grade >3 have an intact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Conventional TKA sacrifices the ACL. Patients with concurrent medial and lateral osteoarthritis and a functional ACL may receive a primary bi-unicondylar arthroplasty. Combined partial knee arthroplasty (CPKA) is an established practice either in bicompartmental femoro-tibial OA or in OA progression after UKA, with the addition of another UKA. A conversion of a lateral UKA to a tricompartmental joint replacement has been reported in the literature. In our case report, we describe a one-stage hypoallergenic tricompartmental UKA, with improved clinical score and no sign of early failure at the last follow-up.

Patellofemoral knee pain following total knee arthroplasty. Comparison between adjusted mechanical and inverse restricted kinematic alignment.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the functional, radiological, and clinical outcomes of patellofemoral joint in patients who had total knee arthroplasty (TKA) without patellar resurfacing for end-stage osteoarthritis using inverse restricted kinematic alignment (irKA) compared to a control group using adjusted mechanical alignment (aMA), both executed with the same implant at the same Institution. The hypothesis was that patients undergoing TKA without patellar resurfacing for end-stage osteoarthritis using irKA would have superior outcomes related to the patellofemoral joint in comparison to a control group using aMA. Methods: A retrospective examination of registries' prospectively obtained from patients who underwent primary TKA at our Institution between 2016 and 2020 was performed. 40 consecutive patients who underwent TKA implant using irKA were compared to a control group of 80 who had undergone adjusted mechanically-aligned TKA. Groups were matched for age and body mass index. Clinical assessment included Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Society Score (KSS), and Kujala Knee Score. Standard weight-bearing anteroposterior and lateral view x-rays were used for radiographic evaluation. Patellar height was assessed using Caton-Deschamps (C-D) and Insall index on lateral view films. Results: In comparison to pre-operative status, both groups had postoperative improvements in VAS, KOOS, KSS, and Kujala ratings (p<0.001). Regarding Kujala score, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (p = 0.68). Insall index and C-D index results were not statistically different across groups (p = 0.02 and 0.74 respectively). Conclusion: Improvements in post-operative clinical and functional outcomes following TKA were associated with either irKA or aMA. There were no discernible changes between the two groups in terms of postoperative patellofemoral discomfort or variations in patellar height.

Medial unicompartmental knee replacement is a viable treatment option after failed high tibial osteotomy: a systematic review.

Purpose: It is debatable whether or not previous high tibial osteotomy (HTO) has negative effects on the results of subsequent medial unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). The purpose of this study is to report, through a systematic review of the literature, the outcomes of medial UKR after failed HTO. It was hypothesized that this procedure would be safe and effective in providing satisfactory postoperative functional outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. Only studies in English pertaining to all levels of evidence reporting on subjects undergoing UKR following HTO were considered. Review articles and expert opinion or editorial pieces were excluded. Outcomes of interest included indications, surgical technique and associated procedures, type of prosthesis, clinical and functional outcomes, rate of complications, revision surgery and failure rate. Results: Overall, six studies met all the inclusion criteria for this review. All were published between 2006 and 2021. The search resulted in one prospective comparative study, four retrospective comparative cohort studies, and one retrospective cohort study. Average follow-up periods ranged from 1 to 13 years. From these studies, 115 patients (117 knees) were identified. Overall, most studies reported satisfying postoperative clinical and functional outcomes. Implant survivorship ranged from 66 to 97.6%. In 15 patients, revision surgery was performed due to persistent pain. Conclusions: Medial UKR performed after failed HTO appears as a feasible procedure providing satisfying outcomes and limited complications in most cases. Further prospective comparative studies reporting long-term outcomes are needed, as high-level studies on this topic are lacking.

Remote Management of Patients after Total Joint Arthroplasty via a Web-Based Registry during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) pandemic, patients who underwent total joint arthroplasty were not able to undergo the proper postoperative surgical and rehabilitative care. This study aims to evaluate the potential of a web-cloud-based database on patients' follow-up in extraordinary situations, when a traditional in-person follow-up cannot be warranted. METHODS: Patients who underwent joint arthroplasty at our Institute between 21 February and 16 March 2020 were included in the study group and were matched to a similar population undergoing joint arthroplasty in February/March 2019. All patients routinely complete questionnaires before and after treatment, including patient-reported outcome measures such as the Visual Analogues Scale (VAS), Knee/Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS/HOOS-PS) and Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) for the monitoring of clinical improvements. RESULTS: 56 (study group) and 144 (control group) patients were included in the study. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements at 3 months. HOOS-PS improvement was significantly reduced in the 2020 group compared to 2019 (21.7 vs. 33.9, p < 0.001). This reduction was related to intense physical activities. Similarly, the functional score improvement related to these activities was reduced for patients undergoing knee replacement (8 vs. 10, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The web-based Institute Registry emerged as a meaningful and sensitive tool during an extraordinary situation such as the COVID-19 pandemic to monitor patients' progression after total joint arthroplasties. Thanks to this tool, it was possible to observe that the prevention of usual postoperative care due to pandemic-related restrictions did not alter the benefits observed after joint replacement surgeries, even if this condition reduced the postoperative improvements in the most burdensome physical activities. A broader use of this kind of tool would improve and potentially reduce the burden and costs of postoperative patients' monitoring in standard and extraordinary conditions. In addition, the systematic remote collection of data would allow for the identification of relevant differences in clinical outcomes in specific conditions or following the modification of treatment and rehabilitation protocols.

Improving radiographic patello-femoral tracking in total knee arthroplasty with the use of a flexion spacer: a case-control study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a flexion spacer in the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to compare these patients to a group of patients subjected to the same type of surgery but without the use of a flexion spacer. It was hypothesized that patients who underwent TKA using a flexion spacer would have better clinical and radiological outcomes than those without a flexion spacer in both short- and medium-term follow-ups. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients undergoing TKA were included, yielding 20 patients in the study group. The control group was identified from the consultant database of the senior author, yielding 21 patients who underwent the same operation. All 41 patients received a Vanguard Knee System (Zimmer-Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana, USA). Cases were defined as those patients who had undergone TKA using a flexion spacer device for gap balancing; controls were defined as patients who had undergone TKA without the support of a flexion spacer device. Patients were clinically and radiographically evaluated at two consecutive follow-ups: T1-13.1 ± 1.3 months and T2-108 ± 6 months. Clinical evaluation was performed using the Knee Society Scoring System and the Western Ontario, McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score. Radiographic evaluation included the femoral angle (α), the tibial angle (ß), the sagittal femoral (γ) angle and the tibial slope (δ). Furthermore, the lateral patellofemoral angle (LPFA) and the Caton-Deschamps index were evaluated. RESULTS: No statistically significant clinical differences were found between the two groups at T1 and T2; moreover, the clinical outcomes of the two groups were stable between the two follow-ups, with no significant improvement or worsening. Radiographic evaluation showed no difference in the two groups between T1 and T2; the only significant radiographic difference between the two groups concerned the LPFA (both at 30° and 60°) at each follow-up, which was significantly greater in cases than in controls (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrates that the use of a flexion spacer significantly improves radiographic patello-femoral tracking, although no significant clinical differences were found between the two groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case-control study, level III.