Quantitative-MRI analysis of the effects of retrograde nailing on vascularity of the distal femur: A cadaveric study.

BACKGROUND: Distal femur fractures remain treatment challenges with a considerable postoperative non-union rate. Concern remains that surgery may compromise osseous vascularity. This study aimed to determine effects of retrograde femoral intramedullary nailing (RFIN) on distal femur vascularity, and the locations of the middle genicular artery terminal branches in relation to the standard RFIN entry point. METHODS: Five lower limb cadaveric pairs were obtained (ten specimens). Experimental limbs were randomly assigned, and contralateral limbs served as controls. An 11 mm femoral nail was implanted in experimental specimens. Controls only underwent a medial parapatellar incision with capsulotomy. Quantitative pre- and post-contrast-MRI was performed to assess arterial contributions to distal femur regions. Osseous vascularity was further evaluated with contrast-CT imaging. Next, specimens were injected with latex medium, and dissection was performed to assess extraosseous vasculature. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found with quantitative-MRI in experimental and control groups for the entire distal femur or individual regions. The experimental group demonstrated a small mean decrease of 1.4% in distal femur arterial contributions. CT and anatomic dissection confirmed maintenance of middle genicular artery terminal branches. On average, 3.3 (±1.3) terminal branches entered along the posterior intercondylar notch. A mean distance of 15.2 mm (±6.9 mm) was found between the posterior RFIN entry point and these terminal branches. CONCLUSIONS: RFIN did not significantly alter arterial contributions to the distal femur or disrupt the middle genicular artery terminal branches. However, care must be taken to ensure nail entry point accuracy given proximity of the entry point to terminal branches.

Intraoperative traction has a negligible time-dependent influence on patient-reported outcomes after hip arthroscopy: a cohort study.

The aim of this study is to determine if post-operative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are influenced by hip arthroscopy traction duration. Patients from a local prospective hip arthroscopy database were retrospectively analyzed. Four hip-specific PROMs were utilized: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (HOS-SS), and international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT). PROMs were collected pre-operatively and 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operatively. Two cohorts were created based on a cut-off corresponding to the 66th percentile for our patient cohort. Analyses were completed for each PROM at each post-operative interval with univariable statistics. Multivariable statistics were examined to identify the variables that were predictive of achieving post-operative minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at the 2-year follow-up. Overall, 222 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 32.4 ± 9.4 years, and 116 (52.3%) were female. The average traction time of the study population was 46.1 ± 12.9 min. A total of 145 patients were included in the short traction cohort (65%) with traction times of <50 min (66th percentile). No significant differences were found regarding PROM scores or MCID achievement rates between both cohorts at any post-operative period. In multivariable analyses, achievement of MCID was predicted by a decrease in traction time for all PROMs and pincer-type resection for mHSS, HOS-ADL and iHOT. There was no difference in PROMs and MCID achievement between longer and shorter traction time cohorts. On multivariable analysis, a decrease in traction time is predictive of MCID for all PROM scores and pincer-type resection was predictive of MCID for most PROM scores. Level of evidence: Level III, cohort study.

Independent predictors of systemic inflammatory response syndrome for intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures: Analysis of national inpatient sample database.

Background: The systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) is a clinical reaction that can occur due to a variety of stimuli. Reamed intramedullary femoral nailing is a common orthopedic surgery that has been shown to induce SIRS. To date, no nationwide analyses have been performed to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and economic burdens of SIRS following intramedullary femoral nailing for femoral shaft fractures. The objective of this study is to investigate the independent predictors, incidence, post-operative, and economic burden of SIRS among patients treated with intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures. Methods: We utilized the 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to identify patients who underwent intramedullary femoral nailing and were diagnosed with non-infectious SIRS (NI-SIRS) based on ICD-10-CM coding. Identified patients who underwent intramedullary femoral nailing were dichotomized into SIRS and Non-SIRS groups to assess independent predictors of SIRS development, and to compare post-operative complications and costs. Results: A total of 65,240 patients with femur shaft fractures underwent IMFN, of which 665 (1.0 %) developed NI-SIRS. Patients with NI-SIRS had a higher incidence of laparotomy (OR = 13.97, p < 0.001), initial treatment with external fixation (OR = 1.845, p < 0.001), and late application of external fixation (OR = 4.884, p = 0.005). Routine discharge (OR = 0.491, p < 0.001) was less likely in patients with NI-SIRS. Length of stay (12.38 days vs 7.16 days, p < 0.001) and total charges ($278, 590 vs $145,118, p < 0.001) were both increased in patients with NI-SIRS. Conclusion: NI-SIRS is associated with increasing injury severity and post-operative complications. Those that developed NI-SIRS experienced higher healthcare resource utilization. Risk factors associated with development of NI-SIRS warrant further investigation.

Predictors of in-hospital surgical site infections in surgically managed acetabular fractures: A nationwide analysis.

Background: A surgical site infection (SSI) rate of 4%-8% has been reported in patients who undergo open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for acetabular fractures. Studies have identified risk factors for SSI, but none have performed a nationwide analysis of SSI in surgically managed acetabular fracture patients. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried for patients who underwent ORIF for acetabular fractures from 2016 to 2019. Analysis was performed on all patients who underwent ORIF for acetabular fractures, as well as those who only underwent ORIF for isolated acetabular fractures. Clinical characteristics, hospital course, discharge disposition, and hospitalization costs were compared between groups. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to assess predictors of SSI. Results: 41,725 patients undergoing acetabular fracture repair were identified, of which 490 (1.2%) developed SSI during hospitalization. Age (45.90 vs 49.90, p < 0.001) and Injury Severity Scale (5.99 vs 8.30, p < 0.001) were increased in patients who developed SSI. History of hypertension (HTN) (OR = 2.343, 95% CI 1.96-2.80, p < 0.001), longer hospital length of stay (30.27 days vs 10.00 days, p < 0.001) and total charges ($469,005 vs $193,032, p < 0.001) were associated with SSI. Lower rates of routine discharge were seen in SSI patients (OR = 0.333, 95% CI 0.260-0.426, p < 0.001). Higher rates of inpatient death were associated with SSI (OR = 2.210, 95% CI 1.172-4.17, p = 0.019). Multiple procedures in addition to acetabular fracture repair, iliac artery embolization, substance abuse, later time to internal fixation and HTN were predictive of SSI (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Severity of injury, time to fixation, and factors associated with compromised cardiovascular integrity were predictors of SSI. Identifying patients at risk for SSI should lead to clinical maneuvers that may optimize outcome.

The Outcome of Hip Arthroscopy in the Setting of Lumbar Spine Disease Is Beneficial, Yet Limited: A Systematic Review of Existing Evidence.

PURPOSE: To compare hip arthroscopy outcomes in femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) patients with concurrent symptomatic lumbar spine disease to the outcomes of arthroscopic FAI patients without spine disease. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines via PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar databases. Studies were valid for inclusion if they had an average follow-up ≥12 months and compared patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hip arthroscopy patients with and without concurrent spinal disease. Data collected included study characteristics, patient demographics, follow-up intervals, surgical indications, spinal pathology, PROMs, and reoperation rates. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in this systematic review. 3,107 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy were evaluated: 1,056 with coexisting lumbar spine disease (spine cohort) and 2,051 control subjects without spine disease (control cohort). The average follow-up period was 24 months. Across included studies, there were 35 instances wherein postoperative PROM scores reported by each cohort were compared. In all 35 instances, the spine cohort reported inferior postoperative PROM scores with the difference being significant (P < .05) on 23 PROMs. Collectively, 23 cases were available contrasting the proportion of each cohort to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). In 22 (95.65%) of these cases, the spine cohort achieved the MCID at a lower rate than the control cohort. There were 14 PROMs, wherein intragroup analyses were reported that compared the preoperative and postoperative score reported by the spine cohort. On all 14 PROMs, the spine cohort reported significant (P < .05) improvement after arthroscopic intervention. CONCLUSION: FAI patients with coexisting lumbar spine pathology experience significant improvement from baseline state after arthroscopic intervention. However, the postoperative outcomes reported are inferior, and the improvement from arthroscopy was limited when compared to surgical control subjects with FAI and normal spinal anatomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV: systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies.

The predictive value of self-reported allergies for reoperation after index hip arthroscopy.

The purpose of this study is to compare the rate of reoperation after index hip arthroscopy for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement in patients with, and without, at least one self-reported allergy. Data were collected prospectively in 1468 patients whose records were retrospectively reviewed. After the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, two cohorts were formed: (i) a study cohort (n = 261) composed of patients with a self-reported allergy and (ii) a control cohort. (n = 666). The allergy cohort had a significantly larger [P < 0.001] reoperation rate (24.1% [63/261]) compared to the control cohort (9.6% [64/66]). Univariate analysis (UVA) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were then performed to better understand the implications of allergy status on the arthroscopic outcome. On UVA the presence of an allergy increased the odds of reoperation after index hip arthroscopy by 2.99 [OR (95% CI): 2.99 (2.04, 4.39); P < 0.001] and for each additional allergy a patient reported, their odds of subsequent surgery increased by 1.27 per allergy [OR (95% CI): 1.27 (1.15, 1.39); P < 0.001]. However, on the MVA, allergy status was not an independent risk factor for reoperation. These findings suggest that allergy status is associated with a higher reoperation rate, however, allergy status alone cannot prognosticate the risk of subsequent surgery. Therefore, allergy status and its association with future surgery after hip arthroscopy should be considered in the context of multiple patient-specific factors that influence the surgical outcome. An understanding of this association enables patient-centered care and will strengthen the physician-patient relationship.

Hip-Spine Syndrome in the Nonarthritic Patient.

Hip-spine syndrome refers to concurrent hip and spine pathology with overlapping symptoms. Most of the literature has studied it in relation to total hip arthroplasty literature and has been shown to increase dislocation risk. Lumbar spine and pelvic mobility have been studied less frequently in relation to nonarthritic pathologic hip states. Understanding the biomechanical relationship between the lumbar spine, pelvis, and hip can help elucidate how hip-spine syndrome affects the nonarthritic hip and how it impacts outcomes of hip arthroscopy. Changes in lumbar spine motion may be the reason certain predisposed patients develop symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) or ischiofemoral impingement. Some athletes may be "hip users" with a low pelvic incidence, making them more reliant on hip motion due to less-intrinsic lumbopelvic motion. When these patients have FAI morphology, their increased reliance on hip motion makes them prone to experiencing femoroacetabular contact and concurrent symptoms. Other athletes may be "spine users," with larger pelvic incidence and more baseline lumbopelvic motion, making them less reliant on hip motion and therefore less prone to experiencing hip impingement even with hip FAI morphology. Hip-spine syndrome also appears to have an impact on patient selection, role of nonoperative treatment, and hip arthroscopy surgical outcomes. Identifying patients with concurrent pathology may allow surgeons to recommend targeted physical therapy or counsel patients better on their expectations after surgery.

Failure to Achieve Threshold Scores on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Within 1 Year Has a Predictive Risk of Subsequent Hip Surgery Within 5 Years of Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Research has identified factors that influence achievement rates of threshold scores on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after hip arthroscopy. However, little data exist on whether failure to achieve a threshold score (minimal clinically important difference [MCID] or substantial clinical benefit [SCB]) in the short term after hip arthroscopy predicts the risk of future hip surgery. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to determine if failure to achieve the MCID or SCB on PROMs within 1 year of hip arthroscopy can be considered a risk factor for repeat surgery within 5 years of primary hip arthroscopy. It was hypothesized that failure to achieve threshold scores would increase the risk of subsequent hip surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was completed. Four PROMs were collected preoperatively and within 1 year of hip arthroscopy: modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports, and the 33-Item International Hip Outcome Tool. RESULTS: Two cohorts were formed: (1) a study cohort (n = 88) composed of patients who underwent repeat hip surgery within 5 years of hip arthroscopy and (2) a control cohort (n = 288) composed of patients who did not require repeat hip surgery. The study cohort had significantly (P < .001) lower scores on all postoperative PROMs, and a significantly (P < .001) smaller percentage of the study cohort met the MCID and SCB. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that not achieving the MCID or SCB on each of the PROMs is an independent risk factor for repeat hip surgery. For every PROM in which a patient failed to achieve the MCID, the odds of subsequent surgery increased by 1.68 (95% CI, 1.42-1.98; P < .001). For every PROM in which a patient failed to achieve the SCB, the odds of subsequent surgery increased by 1.63 (95% CI, 1.35-1.97; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Failure to meet threshold scores on PROMs after hip arthroscopy was an independent risk factor for subsequent hip surgery. This study establishes a novel utility of PROMs and confirms the importance of these metrics in the orthopaedic literature.

Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae Predict Inferior Patient-Reported Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: While the association between spinal disease and hip arthroplasty outcomes has been well studied, there is less known about the effect of spinal pathology in hip arthroscopy (HA) outcomes. Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) are anatomic variations where caudal vertebrae articulate or fuse with the sacrum or ilium. HYPOTHESIS: LSTV can lead to inferior outcomes after HA for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the prospectively collected Hip Arthroscopy Database at our institution for patients with LSTV who underwent HA between 2010 and 2017. A total of 62 patients with LSTV were identified and then matched to controls. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected, including the modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports, and the 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool. They were collected at 4 time points: preoperatively and 5 to 11 months, 12 to 23 months, and 24 to 35 months postoperatively. Longitudinal analysis of the PROMs was done using generalized estimating equation modeling. Additionally, alpha angles were measured from preoperative radiographic data. RESULTS: Preoperatively, there was no significant difference between patients with and without LSTV on 3 of the 4 PROMs; however, patients with LSTV did have significantly lower preoperative scores than controls for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (P = .029). Patients with LSTV reported significantly lower scores on all 4 PROMs at each postoperative time point. Radiographic data showed no significant difference in alpha angles across cohorts. When LSTV were compared by Castellvi type, types 3 and 4 tended to have lower scores than types 1 and 2; however, these comparisons were not significant. CONCLUSION: The data support our hypothesis that HA has less benefit in patients with LSTV as compared with patients without LSTV. In patients with LSTV, careful evaluation of the anomaly is recommended to help guide surgical counseling and manage expectations.

Self-reported allergies correlate with a worse patient-reported outcome after hip arthroscopy: a matched control study.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients with and without at least one self-reported allergy undergoing hip arthroscopy were compared. Data on 1434 cases were retrospectively reviewed, and 267 patients were identified with at least one self-reported allergy and randomly matched to a control group on a 1:2 ratio. Four PROMs [Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports (HOS-Sport) and 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33)] were collected preoperatively, and at 5-11, 12-23 and 24-35 months postoperatively. Significant PROM differences were found 5-11 months postoperative on mHHS (P < 0.001), HOS-ADL (P = 0.002), HOS-Sport (P < 0.001) and iHOT-33 (P < 0.001). At 12-23 months postoperative, the allergy cohort had significantly worse scores on mHHS (P = 0.002), HOS-ADL (P = 0.001), HOS-Sport (P < 0.001) and iHOT-33 (P < 0.001). They also had significantly worse measures 24-35 months postoperative on mHHS (P = 0.019), HOS-Sport (P = 0.006) and iHOT-33 (P < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression showed that each additional allergy reported significantly increased the risk of failing to meet the minimal clinically important difference 5-11 months after surgery on mHHS by 1.15 [OR (95% CI): 1.15 (1.03, 1.30), P = 0.014], on HOS-ADL by 1.16 [OR (95% CI): 1.16 (1.02, 1.31), P = 0.021] and on iHOT-33 by 1.20 [OR (95% CI): 1.20 (1.07, 1.36), P = 0.002]. Results suggest self-reported allergies increase the likelihood of a patient-perceived worse outcome after hip arthroscopy. An understanding of this association by the physician is essential during presurgical planning and in the management of postoperative care.

A history of spine surgery predicts a poor outcome after hip arthroscopy.

This study compared patient reported outcomes scores (PROMs) between patients undergoing hip arthroscopy who have and have not had previous lumbar spine surgery. We aimed to determine if prior spine surgery impacts the outcome of hip arthroscopy. Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed in patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between 2010 and 2017. Twenty cases were identified for analysis and matched to a control group. Four PROMs were collected pre-operatively and between 6 months and 2 years post-operatively (mean 16.2 months): Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports (HOS-Sports) and the 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Patients with previous spine surgery reported significantly worse (P-value <0.001) post-operative scores on all PROMs and smaller net changes on all PROMs with the difference on the mHHS (P-value 0.007), HOS-Sport (P-value 0.009) and iHOT-33 (P-value 0.007) being significant. Subsequent analyses revealed that the type of spine surgery matters. Patients with a spine fusion reported worse post-operative scores on all PROMs compared with patients with a spine decompression surgery with the difference on the mHHS (P-value 0.001), HOS-ADL (P-value 0.011) and HOS-Sport (P-value 0.035) being significant. Overall, patients with prior decompression surgery experienced considerable improvements from hip arthroscopy whereas patients with a prior spine fusion reported poor post-operative outcomes. Given these results, it is vital that hip preservation surgeons understand the impact of the lumbar spine on the outcome of hip arthroscopy.