RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest an increased risk for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) utilizing the direct anterior (DA) approach to the hip. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether such an increased risk does indeed exist on a large cohort of patients, operated by experienced surgeons and taking into account various confounders. METHODS: This was a single institutional study, including all patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty during the last decade, who were operated on by four high-volume arthroplasty surgeons utilizing a single surgical approach. Three of them utilized the direct lateral (DL) approach while one of them used the DA approach throughout the entire study. Patient characteristics, demographics, and comorbidities were assessed as well as operative and perioperative factors and their association with PJI. Association between surgical approach and PJI was evaluated in a univariate followed by a multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 10,201 patients were included in the study. Of those, 4390 (43.0%) underwent total hip arthroplasty through the DA approach and 5811 (57.0%) through the DL approach. PJI rates were 0.9% (38/4390) in the DA group compared with 1.3% (73/5811) in the DL group (P = .068). Results from a regression analysis showed no significant association between PJI and DA approach (adjusted odds ratio 0.760, 95% confidence interval 0.428-1.348, P = .348). The risk remained nonsignificant in patients with higher body mass index. There were also no significant differences in the infecting organisms between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The DA approach to the hip does not increase the risk for subsequent PJI.
Assuntos
Artrite Infecciosa , Artroplastia de Quadril , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese , Humanos , Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used as part of multimodal analgesia in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors (e.g., celecoxib) are believed to have fewer gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects than nonselective NSAIDS. Meloxicam is less selective for COX-2 than celecoxib is and partially inhibits COX-1 at higher doses. Nonetheless, some surgeons prefer using nonselective NSAIDs because of their lower expense. METHODS: Four thousand nine hundred ninety-four patients who underwent TKA between January 2015 and February 2020 and took either celecoxib (n = 3,174), meloxicam 15 mg/d (n = 1,819), or meloxicam 7.5 mg/d (n = 451) were studied. Mutlimodal postoperative analgesia protocols were otherwise similar. GI bleeding and wound complication incidence were determined, as well as average 30-day prescription costs. RESULTS: GI bleeding incidence was similar in the three cohorts (P = 0.4). The incidence of wound complications did not significantly differ between the groups: 0.06%, 0.07%, and 0.22% in the celecoxib, meloxicam 15 mg/d, and meloxicam 7.5 mg/d groups, respectively (P = 0.06). Subsituting meloxicam for celecoxib results in an average savings of $183 per prescription. DISCUSSION: Meloxicam used at higher doses (15 mg/d) does not markedly increase the risk of GI or wound complications associated with COX-1 inhibition and is less costly for multimodal analgesia after TKA.