Static Non-articulating Knee Spacers Are Associated with a High Degree of Morbidity in Challenging Clinical Scenarios.

The morbidity associated with the use of static non-articulating knee spacers for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in challenging clinical scenarios has not been well described. From 2011-2019, 63 molded block static spacers were utilized at two academic institutions for the treatment of PJI with associated severe soft tissue compromise (59%), collateral ligament deficiency (49%), extensor mechanism compromise (48%), or type 3 bone defects (44%). Complications and outcomes were assessed. Complications with the use of static spacers were common and included further bone loss (46%), spacer migration (16%), extensor mechanism compromise (16%), cast or related soft tissue injuries (16%), fracture (13%), and spacer breakage (3%). Ultimately, 22% of patients underwent amputation. Patient variables such as age and body mass index were not associated with outcomes. Static knee spacers are associated with substantial morbidity in challenging clinical scenarios and alternatives may need to be considered. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(2):122-126, 2023).

The 2021 Association Research Circulation Osseous Classification for Early-Stage Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head to Computed Tomography-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: The Association Research Circulation Osseous developed a novel classification for early-stage (precollapse) osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). We hypothesized that the novel classification is more reliable and valid when compared to previous 3 classifications: Steinberg, modified Kerboul, and Japanese Investigation Committee classifications. METHODS: In the novel classification, necrotic lesions were classified into 3 types: type 1 is a small lesion, where the lateral necrotic margin is medial to the femoral head apex; type 2 is a medium-sized lesion, with the lateral necrotic margin being between the femoral head apex and the lateral acetabular edge; and type 3 is a large lesion, which extends outside the lateral acetabular edge. In a derivation cohort of 40 early-stage osteonecrotic hips based on computed tomography imaging, reliabilities were evaluated using kappa coefficients, and validities to predict future femoral head collapse by chi-squared tests and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses. The predictability for future collapse was also evaluated in a validation cohort of 104 early-stage ONFH. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, interobserver reliability (k = 0.545) and intraobserver agreement (63%-100%) of the novel method were higher than the other 3 classifications. The novel classification system was best able to predict future collapse (P < .05) and had the best discrimination between non-progressors and progressors in both the derivation cohort (area under the curve = 0.692 [0.522-0.863], P < .05) and the validation cohort (area under the curve = 0.742 [0.644-0.841], P = 2.46 × 10-5). CONCLUSION: This novel classification is a highly reliable and valid method of those examined. Association Research Circulation Osseous recommends using this method as a unified classification for early-stage ONFH. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: an Updated Review of ARCO on Pathogenesis, Staging and Treatment.

Non-traumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) usually affects adults younger than 50 years and frequently leads to femoral head collapse and subsequent arthritis of the hip. It is becoming more prevalent along with increasing use of corticosteroids for the adjuvant therapy of leukemia and other myelogenous diseases as well as management of organ transplantation. This review updated knowledge on the pathogenesis, classification criteria, staging system, and treatment of ONFH.

Does Intraoperative Fluoroscopy Improve Limb-Length Discrepancy and Acetabular Component Positioning During Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: One potential benefit of the direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty is the ability to use intraoperative fluoroscopy for acetabular cup positioning and limb-length evaluation. Previous studies comparing the use of fluoroscopy with an anterior approach to a posterior approach have reported conflicting results. To our knowledge, no prior study has compared acetabular cup position and limb-length discrepancy (LLD) using a DAA with and without fluoroscopy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 298 patients who underwent direct anterior total hip arthroplasty with or without intraoperative fluoroscopy. All procedures were performed by 2 surgeons who use DAA as their primary approach. Preoperative and 6-week postoperative low anteroposterior pelvis and cross-table lateral radiographs were reviewed by 3 independent surgeons. Acetabular cup inclination, anteversion, and LLD were measured and compared. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were excluded for inadequate imaging, leaving 125 patients in the fluoroscopy group and 140 patients in the nonfluoroscopy group. Mean inclination, anteversion, and LLD were 39.4° (95% confidence interval [CI], 38.5°-40.2°), 30.2° (95% CI, 29.2°-31.2°), and 1.1 mm (95% CI, 0.1 mm-2.2 mm) for the fluoroscopy group and 39.9° (95% CI, 39.3°-40.5°), 31.1° (95% CI, 30.0°-32.2°), and 0.8 mm (95% CI, -0.1 mm to 1.6 mm) for the nonfluoroscopy group. There was no significant difference in acetabular inclination (P = .35), anteversion (P = .22), or postoperative LLD (P = .64) between groups. CONCLUSION: This study found no clinically or statistically significant difference in acetabular inclination, anteversion, or LLD between the fluoroscopy and nonfluoroscopy groups. Both surgeons achieved a similar mean acetabular cup position and an equivalent mean LLD.

Isolated tibial insert exchange in revision total knee arthroplasty : reliable and durable for wear; less so for instability, insert fracture/dissociation, or stiffness.

AIMS: This study aimed to determine outcomes of isolated tibial insert exchange (ITIE) during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: From 1985 to 2016, 270 ITIEs were performed at one institution for instability (55%, n = 148), polyethylene wear (39%, n = 105), insert fracture/dissociation (5%, n = 14), or stiffness (1%, n = 3). Patients with component loosening, implant malposition, infection, and extensor mechanism problems were excluded. RESULTS: Survivorship free of any re-revision was 68% at ten years. For the indication of insert wear, survivorship free of any re-revision at ten years was 74%. Re-revisions were more frequent for index diagnoses other than wear (hazard ratio (HR) 1.9; p = 0.013), with ten-year survivorships of 69% for instability and 37% for insert fracture/dissociation. Following ITIE for wear, the most common reason for re-revision was aseptic loosening (33%, n = 7). For other indications, the most common reason for re-revision was recurrence of the original diagnosis. Mean Knee Society Scores improved from 54 (0 to 94) preoperatively to 77 (38 to 94) at ten years. CONCLUSION: After ITIE, the risk and reasons for re-revision correlated with preoperative indications. The best results were for polyethylene wear. For other diagnoses, the re-revision rate was higher and the failure mode was most commonly recurrence of the original indication for the revision TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1103-1110.

Biconvex Patellar Components: 96% Durability at 10 Years in 262 Revision Total Knee Arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy to address osseous deficiencies of the patella during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. One possible solution is a cemented biconvex patellar component used such that the non-articular convexity both improves fixation and makes up for bone loss. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of the use of biconvex patellar components in a large series of revision TKAs. METHODS: From 1996 to 2014, 262 revision TKAs were performed at a single institution using a biconvex patellar component. Implant survivorship, clinical and radiographic results, and complications were assessed. The mean patient age at the TKA revision was 69 years, and 53% of the patients were female. The mean follow-up was 7 years. RESULTS: The 10-year survivorship free of revision of the biconvex patellar component due to aseptic loosening was 96%. The 10-year survivorship free of any revision of the biconvex patellar component was 87%. The 10-year survivorship free of any rerevision and free of any reoperation was 75% and 70%, respectively. The mean Knee Society Score (KSS) improved from 45.4 before the index revision to 67.7 after it. The mean residual composite thickness seen on the most recent radiographs was 18.1 mm. In addition to the complications leading to revision, the most common complications were periprosthetic patellar fracture (6%), of which 3 required revision; superficial wound infection (6%) requiring antibiotic therapy only or irrigation and debridement; and arthrofibrosis (3%). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of 262 revision TKAs, biconvex patellar components used to treat marked patellar bone loss demonstrated excellent durability with a 10-year survivorship free of patellar rerevision due to aseptic loosening of 96%. The biconvex patellar components were reliable as evidenced by substantial improvements in clinical outcomes scores and a low risk of complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Implant Sonication versus Tissue Culture for the Diagnosis of Spinal Implant Infection.

MINI: We compared the sensitivity and specificity of peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing-sonication technique for the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII). Lower thresholds of sonicate fluid culture positivity showed increased sensitivity with maintained specificity. We recommend a threshold of 20 CFU/10 mL for sonicate culture positivity for the diagnosis of SII. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective study comparing the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII) by peri-implant tissue culture to vortexing-sonication of retrieved spinal implants. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that vortexing-sonication would be more sensitive than peri-implant tissue culture. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: We previously showed implant vortexing-sonication followed by culture to be more sensitive than standard peri-implant tissue culture for diagnosing of SII. In this follow-up study, we analyzed the largest sample size available in the literature to compare these two culture methods and evaluated thresholds for positivity for sonicate fluid for SII diagnosis. METHODS: We compared peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing-sonication technique which samples bacterial biofilm on the surface of retrieved spinal implants. We evaluated different thresholds for sonicate fluid positivity and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the two culture methods for the diagnosis of SII. RESULTS: A total of 152 patients were studied. With more than 100 colony forming units (CFU)/10 mL as a threshold for sonicate fluid culture positivity, there were 46 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 65.2% and 79.6%; the specificities were 88.7% and 93.4%, respectively. With more than 50 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 50 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 68.0% and 76.0%; the specificities were 92.2% for both methods. Finally, with more than or equal to 20 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 52 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 69.2% and 82.7%; the specificities were 94.0% and 92.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Implant sonication followed by culture is a sensitive and specific method for the diagnosis of SII. Lower thresholds for defining sonicate fluid culture positivity allow for increased sensitivity with a minimal decrease in specificity, enhancing the clinical utility of implant sonication. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

This is a retrospective study comparing the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII) by peri-implant tissue culture to vortexing­sonication of retrieved spinal implants. We hypothesized that vortexing­sonication would be more sensitive than peri-implant tissue culture. We previously showed implant vortexing­sonication followed by culture to be more sensitive than standard peri-implant tissue culture for diagnosing of SII. In this follow-up study, we analyzed the largest sample size available in the literature to compare these two culture methods and evaluated thresholds for positivity for sonicate fluid for SII diagnosis. We compared peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing­sonication technique which samples bacterial biofilm on the surface of retrieved spinal implants. We evaluated different thresholds for sonicate fluid positivity and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the two culture methods for the diagnosis of SII. A total of 152 patients were studied. With more than 100 colony forming units (CFU)/10 mL as a threshold for sonicate fluid culture positivity, there were 46 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 65.2% and 79.6%; the specificities were 88.7% and 93.4%, respectively. With more than 50 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 50 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 68.0% and 76.0%; the specificities were 92.2% for both methods. Finally, with more than or equal to 20 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 52 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 69.2% and 82.7%; the specificities were 94.0% and 92.0%, respectively. Implant sonication followed by culture is a sensitive and specific method for the diagnosis of SII. Lower thresholds for defining sonicate fluid culture positivity allow for increased sensitivity with a minimal decrease in specificity, enhancing the clinical utility of implant sonication. Level of Evidence: 4.

Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Safely and Effectively Reduces Transfusion Rates in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid (TXA) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been well established. However, there have been limited data for revision TKAs. The primary aim was to assess the impact of intravenous TXA on transfusion rates and symptomatic venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) in a large revision TKA cohort with or without intravenous TXA utilization. METHODS: A retrospective review of revision TKAs performed from 2005 to 2014 was performed, identifying 2,951 procedures (2,219 patients), in which TXA was utilized in 1,144 procedures (39%). The mean age was 65 years with 52% female patients in the TXA revision group and 67 years with 52% female patients in the non-TXA revision group. Transfusion rates and symptomatic VTEs were the primary outcomes assessed. Comparisons were performed between cohorts, utilizing a unique propensity model to mitigate bias, on the basis of TXA use and subsequently for aseptic or septic revision etiology. RESULTS: Significant reductions in transfusion rates with use of TXA were identified in revision TKAs overall (13% compared with 39%; p < 0.001 [adjusted relative risk, 1.7]), including revisions for both aseptic etiology (6% with TXA compared with 28% without TXA; p < 0.001) and septic etiology (31% with TXA compared with 54% without TXA; p < 0.001). The risk of a postoperative symptomatic VTE was not significantly different (adjusted p = 0.63) with use of TXA at 11 events (1.0%) compared with 24 events (1.3%) in the non-TXA group). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous TXA significantly reduced transfusion rates in revision TKAs by approximately twofold, including cohorts revised for aseptic and septic etiologies. There was a very low rate of VTEs (1.2%) with no significant difference in the number of VTEs between groups after adjusting risk utilizing propensity modeling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.