Tips and Tricks to Save You During Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

The number of revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) performed annually continues to rise. This article is a summary of a symposium on revision TKAs presented at the 2023 American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons annual meeting. It will provide an overview of the surgical tips and tricks for exposure and component removal, use of metaphyseal fixation and stems to manage bone loss and optimize fixation, constraint in TKA, as well as how to manage extensor mechanism disruptions with a synthetic mesh reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

Technology in Total Knee Arthroplasty in 2023.

Over the past few decades, instrumentation and techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have evolved from conventional manual tools to a wide range of technologies, including calibrated guides for accurate bone cuts and alignment, smart tools, dynamic intraoperative sensors for soft-tissue balancing, patient-specific guides, computer navigation, and robotics. This review is intended to provide an overview of the latest advancements in TKA technology, address potential challenges and solutions related to the application of these technologies, and explore their limitations.

New Ceramic Heads With Titanium Sleeves on Retained Femoral Components: Results of Over 500 Revision Total Hip Arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: Ceramic heads are frequently combined with titanium sleeves in revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs), ostensibly to protect the ceramic head from existing damage to the retained trunnion. Although widely adopted, data on the performance and safety of this construct are minimal. The purpose of this study was to describe implant survivorships, radiographic results, and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent revision THA with a ceramic head and titanium sleeve on a retained femoral component. METHODS: We identified 516 revision THAs with femoral component retention (328 acetabular-only revisions and 188 bearing surface exchanges) treated with a new ceramic head and titanium sleeve between 2000 and 2020. Mean age at revision was 64 years, 56% were women, and mean body mass index was 30. The indications for revision THA were adverse local tissue reaction (25%), acetabular loosening (24%), dislocation (17%), infection (5%), and other (29%). Kaplan-Meier survivorships were analyzed, radiographs reviewed, and Harris Hip Scores evaluated. Mean follow-up was 4 years (range, 2 to 10). RESULTS: There were no reoperations or failures for ceramic head fracture, taper corrosion, or head/sleeve disengagement. The 10-year survivorship free of any re-revision was 85%. Indications for the 57 re-revisions included dislocation (33), infection (13), acetabular component loosening (7), periprosthetic fracture (2), psoas impingement (1), and sciatic nerve irritation (1). The 10-year survivorship free of any reoperation was 82%. There were an additional 14 reoperations. Radiographically, 1.9% had progressive femoral radiolucent lines, and 4.7% had progressive acetabular radiolucent lines. Mean Harris Hip Score was 81 at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: New ceramic heads with titanium sleeves in revision THAs with retained femoral components were durable and reliable with no cases of ceramic head fracture or taper complications at mean 4-year follow-up, including those revised for adverse local tissue reaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Systemic Osteoporosis and Osteopenia Among Periprosthetic Fractures After Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Most periprosthetic fractures following total hip arthroplasty (THA) are fragility fractures that qualify patients for osteoporosis diagnoses. However, it remains unknown how many patients were diagnosed who had osteoporosis before injury or received the proper evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment after injury. METHODS: We identified 171 Vancouver B2 (109) and B3 (62) periprosthetic femur fractures treated with a modular fluted tapered stem from 2000 to 2018 at 1 institution. The mean patient age was 75 years (range, 35 to 94), 50% were women, and the mean body mass index was 29 (range, 17 to 60). We identified patients who had osteoporosis or osteopenia diagnoses, a fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), bone mineral density (BMD) testing, an endocrinology consult, and osteoporosis medications. Age-appropriate BMD testing was defined as no later than 1 year after the recommended ages of 65 (women) or 70 years (men). The mean follow-up was 11 years (range, 4 to 21). RESULTS: Falls from standing height caused 94% of fractures and thus, by definition, qualified as osteoporosis-defining events. The prevalence of osteoporosis diagnosis increased from 20% before periprosthetic fracture to 39% after (P < .001). The prevalence of osteopenia diagnosis increased from 13% before the fracture to 24% after (P < .001). The prevalence of either diagnosis increased from 24% before fracture to 44% after (P < .001). No patients had documented FRAX scores before fracture, and only 2% had scores after. The prevalence of BMD testing was 21% before fracture and 22% after (P = .88). By the end of the final follow-up, only 16% had received age-appropriate BMD testing. The proportion of patients who had endocrinology consults increased from 6% before the fracture to 25% after (P < .001). The proportion on bisphosphonate therapy was 19% before fracture and 25% after (P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Although most periprosthetic fractures following THA are fragility fractures that qualify patients for osteoporosis diagnoses, there remain major gaps in diagnosis, screening, endocrinology follow-up, and treatment. Like nonarthroplasty fragility fractures, a systematic approach is needed after periprosthetic fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Did the Physical and Mental Health of Orthopaedic Patients Change After the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

BACKGROUND: The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been associated with poor mental health outcomes and widened health disparities in the United States. Given the inter-relationship between psychosocial factors and functional outcomes in orthopaedic surgery, it is important that we understand whether patients presenting for musculoskeletal care during the pandemic were associated with worse physical and mental health than before the pandemic's onset. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Did patients seen for an initial visit by an orthopaedic provider during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate worse physical function, pain interference, depression, and/or anxiety than patients seen before the pandemic, as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instrument? (2) During the COVID-19 pandemic, did patients living in areas with high levels of social deprivation demonstrate worse patterns of physical function, pain interference, depression, or anxiety on initial presentation to an orthopaedic provider than patients living in areas with low levels of social deprivation, compared with prepandemic PROMIS scores? METHODS: This was a retrospective, comparative study of new patient evaluations that occurred in the orthopaedic department at a large, urban tertiary care academic medical center. During the study period, PROMIS computer adaptive tests were routinely administered to patients at clinical visits. Between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019, we identified 26,989 new patients; we excluded 4% (1038 of 26,989) for being duplicates, 4% (1034 of 26,989) for having incomplete demographic data, 44% (11,925 of 26,989) for not having a nine-digit home ZIP Code recorded, and 5% (1332 of 26,989) for not completing all four PROMIS computer adaptive tests of interest. This left us with 11,660 patients in the "before COVID-19" cohort. Between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021, we identified 30,414 new patients; we excluded 5% (1554 of 30,414) for being duplicates, 4% (1142 of 30,414) for having incomplete demographic data, 41% (12,347 of 30,414) for not having a nine-digit home ZIP Code recorded, and 7% (2219 of 30,414) for not completing all four PROMIS computer adaptive tests of interest. This left us with 13,152 patients in the "during COVID-19" cohort. Nine-digit home ZIP Codes were used to determine patients' Area Deprivation Indexes, a neighborhood-level composite measure of social deprivation. To ensure that patients included in the study represented our overall patient population, we performed univariate analyses on available demographic and PROMIS data between patients included in the study and those excluded from the study, which revealed no differences (results not shown). In the before COVID-19 cohort, the mean age was 57 ± 16 years, 60% (7046 of 11,660) were women, 86% (10,079 of 11,660) were White non-Hispanic, and the mean national Area Deprivation Index percentile was 47 ± 25. In the during COVID-19 cohort, the mean age was 57 ± 16 years, 61% (8051 of 13,152) were women, 86% (11,333 of 13,152) were White non-Hispanic, and the mean national Area Deprivation Index percentile was 46 ± 25. The main outcome measures in this study were the PROMIS Physical Function ([PF], version 2.0), Pain Interference ([PI], version 1.1), Depression (version 1.0), and Anxiety (version 1.0). PROMIS scores follow a normal distribution with a mean t-score of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Higher PROMIS PF scores indicate better self-reported physical capability, whereas higher PROMIS PI, Depression, and Anxiety scores indicate more difficulty managing pain, depression, and anxiety symptoms, respectively. Clinically meaningful differences in PROMIS scores between the cohorts were based on a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) threshold of 4 points. Multivariable linear regression models were created to determine whether presentation to an orthopaedic provider during the pandemic was associated with worse PROMIS scores than for patients who presented before the pandemic. Regression coefficients (ß) represent the estimated difference in PROMIS scores that would be expected for patients who presented during the pandemic compared with patients who presented before the pandemic, after adjusting for confounding variables. Regression coefficients were evaluated in the context of clinical importance and statistical significance. Regression coefficients equal to or greater than the MCID of 4 points were considered clinically important, whereas p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: We found no clinically important differences in baseline physical and mental health PROMIS scores between new patients who presented to an orthopaedic provider before the COVID-19 pandemic and those who presented during the COVID-19 pandemic (PROMIS PF: ß -0.2 [95% confidence interval -0.43 to 0.03]; p = 0.09; PROMIS PI: ß 0.06 [95% CI -0.13 to 0.25]; p = 0.57; PROMIS Depression: ß 0.09 [95% CI -0.14 to 0.33]; p = 0.44; PROMIS Anxiety: ß 0.58 [95% CI 0.33 to 0.84]; p < 0.001). Although patients from areas with high levels of social deprivation had worse PROMIS scores than patients from areas with low levels of social deprivation, patients from areas with high levels of social deprivation demonstrated no clinically important differences in PROMIS scores when groups before and during the pandemic were compared (PROMIS PF: ß -0.23 [95% CI -0.80 to 0.33]; p = 0.42; PROMIS PI: ß 0.18 [95% CI -0.31 to 0.67]; p = 0.47; PROMIS Depression: ß 0.42 [95% CI -0.26 to 1.09]; p = 0.23; PROMIS Anxiety: ß 0.84 [95% CI 0.16 to 1.52]; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Contrary to studies describing worse physical and mental health since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found no changes in the health status of orthopaedic patients on initial presentation to their provider. Although large-scale action to mitigate the effects of worsening physical or mental health of orthopaedic patients may not be needed at this time, orthopaedic providers should remain aware of the psychosocial needs of their patients and advocate on behalf of those who may benefit from intervention. Our study is limited in part to patients who had the self-agency to access specialty orthopaedic care, and therefore may underestimate the true changes in the physical or mental health status of all patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Future longitudinal studies evaluating the impact of specific COVID-19-related factors (for example, delays in medical care, social isolation, or financial loss) on orthopaedic outcomes may be helpful to prepare for future pandemics or natural disasters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study.

Patients' Perceptions of Remote Monitoring and App-Based Rehabilitation Programs: A Comparison of Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring rehabilitation programs are new technologies growing in popularity for patients undergoing lower extremity total joint arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to assess the patients' perceptions of these technologies. METHODS: Patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty arthroplasty (TKA), and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) from September 2020 to February 2022, and participated in a clinical study utilizing remote monitoring and an app-based rehabilitation program were given a questionnaire 3 months postoperatively to assess their perceptions of these technologies. There were 166 patients who completed the survey (42 THA; 106 TKA; 18 UKA). RESULTS: There were 92% of patients who found the technology easy to use. A majority of patients felt the technologies motivated them. The TKA/UKA patients felt more strongly that these technologies allowed the surgeon to monitor their recovery closely (81.9% versus 65.9%; P = .009). There were 85% of THA patients and 94.5% of TKA/UKA patients recommended these technologies. The THA patients felt more strongly that digital rehabilitation could completely replace in-person physical therapy compared to TKA/UKA patients (85.4% versus 41.3%; P < .001). A majority (83%) of patients recommended a combination of inpatient and technology-assisted rehabilitation (THA 90.2%; 84.4% TKA/UKA). CONCLUSION: The THA and TKA/UKA patients found remote monitoring rehabilitation easy to use, increased motivation, and recommend it to other patients undergoing lower extremity arthroplasty. They recommend a combination of technology and in-person rehabilitation postoperatively. The THA patients felt these technologies could replace in-person rehabilitation programs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award: Tourniquet Use Does Not Impact Trajectory of Total Knee Arthroplasty Early Recovery: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of tourniquet use on recovery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. The purpose of this prospective, single blinded, randomized controlled trial was to investigate the effect of tourniquet use on early recovery after TKA using a smartphone app-based patient engagement platform (PEP) with a wrist-based activity monitor to obtain more robust data on early recovery. METHODS: There were 107 patients undergoing primary TKA for osteoarthritis who were enrolled (54 tourniquet [TQ+]; 53 no tourniquet [TQ-]). All patients utilized a PEP and wrist-based activity sensor for 2 weeks preoperatively and 90 days postoperatively to collect Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores and opioid consumption, as well as weekly Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and monthly Forgotten Joint Score (FJS). There was no difference in demographics between groups. Formal physical therapy assessments were performed preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Independent sample t-tests were used for continuous data and Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for discrete data. RESULTS: Tourniquet use did not have a statistically significant impact on daily VAS pain or opioid consumption during the first 30 days postoperatively (P > .05). Tourniquet use did not have a significant impact on OKS or FJS at 30 or 90 days postoperatively (P > .05), or on performance of formal physical therapy testing at 3 months postoperatively (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Using a digital technology to collect daily patient data, we found that tourniquet use has no clinically significant negative impact on pain and function in the first 90 days after primary TKA.

Prior Authorization in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Membership.

BACKGROUND: This study surveyed the impact that prior authorization has on the practices of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS). METHODS: A 24-question survey was approved by the AAHKS Advocacy Committee and distributed to all 2,802 board-certified members of AAHKS. RESULTS: There were 353 survey responses (13%). Ninety-five percent of surgeons noted a 5-year increase in prior authorization. A majority (71%) of practices employ at least 1 staff member to exclusively work on prior authorization. Average time spent on prior authorization was 15 h/wk (range, 1 to 125) and average number of claims peer week was 18 (range, 1 to 250). Surgeries (99%) were the most common denial. These were denied because nonoperative treatment had not been tried (71%) or had not been attempted for enough time (67%). Most (57%) prior authorization processes rarely/never changed the treatment provided. Most (56%) indicated that prior authorization rarely/never followed evidence-based guidelines. A majority (93%) expressed high administrative burden as well as negative clinical outcomes (87%) due to prior authorization including delays to access care (96%) at least sometimes. DISCUSSION: Prior authorization has increased in the past 5 years resulting in high administrative burden. Prior authorizations were most common for TJA surgeries because certain nonoperative treatments were not attempted or not attempted for enough time. Surgeons indicated that prior authorization may be detrimental to high-value care and lead to potentially harmful delays in care without ultimately changing the management of the patient.

Orthopedic Surgery and Anesthesiology Surgical Improvement Strategies Project - Phase III Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Our institution initiated the Orthopedic Surgery and Anesthesiology Surgical Improvement Strategies (OASIS) project in 2017 to improve the quality and efficiency for hip and knee arthroplasties. Phase III of this project aimed to: 1) increase same-day discharge (SDD) of primary total joint arthroplasties (TJAs) to 20%; 2) maintain or improve 30-day readmission rates; and 3) realize cost savings and revenue increases. METHODS: All primary TJAs performed between 2021 and 2022 represented our study cohort, with those in 2019 (prepandemic) establishing the baseline cohort. A multidisciplinary team met weekly to track project tactics and metrics through the entire episode of care from preoperative surgical visit through 30 days postoperatively. RESULTS: The SDD rate increased from 4% at baseline to 37%, with mean lengths of stay (LOS) decreasing from 1.5 to 0.9 days for all primary TJAs. The 30-day readmission rate decreased to 1.2 from 1.3%. Composite changes in surgical volume and cost reductions equaled $5 million. CONCLUSION: Application of a multidisciplinary team with health systems engineering tools and methods allowed SDD to increase from 4 to 37% with a mean LOS <1 day, resulting in a $5 million incremental gain in profit at a major academic medical center. Importantly, patient safety was not compromised as 30-day readmission rates remained stable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Therapeutic.

A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Ketamine in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine is administered intraoperatively to treat pain associated with primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ketamine in primary THA and TKA to support the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS), American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), Hip Society, Knee Society, and the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Management (ASRA). METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for studies published prior to 2020 on ketamine in THA and TKA. All included studies underwent qualitative assessment and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of ketamine. After a critical appraisal of 136 publications, 7 high-quality studies were included for analyses. RESULTS: High-quality evidence demonstrates that intraoperative ketamine decreases postoperative opioid consumption. Four of 7 studies found that ketamine reduces postoperative pain. Intraoperative ketamine is not associated with an increase in adverse events and may reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting (relative risk [RR] 0.68; 95% CI 0.50-0.92). CONCLUSION: High-quality evidence supports the use of ketamine intraoperatively in THA and TKA to reduce postoperative opioid consumption. Most studies found ketamine reduces postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting. Moderate quality evidence supports the safety of ketamine, but it should be used cautiously in patients at risk for postoperative delirium, such as the elderly.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

Preoperative Opioids and the Dose-Dependent Effect on Outcomes After Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to identify the preoperative daily opioid dose associated with increased complications after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: Primary THA patients in the Humana claims database (2007-2020) with an opioid prescription within 3 months prior to surgery were identified. Patients were stratified based on daily opioid dose: Tier 1, <5 milligram morphine equivalents (MME); Tier 2, 5-10 MME; Tier 3, 11-25 MME; Tier 4, 26-50 MME; Tier 5, >50 MME. Each tier was matched 1:1 to opioid-naïve patients. Emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and postoperative complications were compared. RESULTS: In total, 67,719 patients using preoperative opioids were identified and matched. 17.0% of patients using preoperative opioids visited the ED within 90 days, compared to 13.3% of opioid-naïve patients (P < .001). About 9.5% of patients using preoperative opioids were readmitted within 90 days, compared to 7.4% of opioid-naïve patients (P < .001). When stratified by tier, opioid users in all tiers had higher risk of ED visits and readmission. Rates of superficial infection, periprosthetic joint infection, and dislocation were increased in patients taking preoperative opioids in Tiers 2 through 5. Patients in Tiers 3 through 5 had an increased risk of revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Preoperative opioid use is associated with a dose-dependent increase in complications after THA. Just one 5 mg hydrocodone tablet daily leads to a significant increase in ED visits and readmission, while higher doses are associated with dislocation, superficial infection, periprosthetic joint infection, and revision surgery. Continued education regarding the harmful effects of opioids prescribed for the nonoperative treatment of osteoarthritis is still needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With a Rotating-Hinge Prosthesis Mated to a Well-Fixed Femoral Sleeve.

BACKGROUND: Some knee systems have the unique capability to mate a new hinged femoral component to a well-fixed metaphyseal sleeve from a prior revision. We compared survivorship, radiographs, and clinical outcomes of a rotating-hinge total knee arthroplasty mated to a new metaphyseal sleeve vs a well-fixed sleeve. METHODS: Sixty patients with an S-ROM Noiles (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN) rotating-hinge total knee arthroplasty implanted from 1998 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Nine patients (15%) had the femoral component mated to a well-fixed sleeve and 51 patients (85%) had a new sleeve. Mean age was 68 years, 68% were female, and mean body mass index was 33 kg/m2. The incidences of re-revision and reoperation were calculated, Knee Society Scores were measured, and radiographs were reviewed. Mean follow-up was 5 years. RESULTS: There were 2 re-revisions (22%) in patients with a well-fixed sleeve: 1 for infection and 1 for aseptic loosening of the femur and tibia. There were no unique failures including the taper junction. Nine patients (18%) with a new sleeve were re-revised: 7 for infection and 2 for tibial aseptic loosening. The mean Knee Society Score for all patients improved from 39 to 73. Radiographically, all components were well fixed except for one loose femur in a patient with a new sleeve. CONCLUSION: Mating an S-ROM femur to a well-fixed sleeve from a prior revision is a safe, simple, and durable option in the short term that prevents morbidity associated with removal of a well-fixed sleeve. No new modes of failure were observed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (retrospective), Therapeutic.

Treatment of Flexion Instability After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Operative and Nonoperative Management of 218 Cases.

BACKGROUND: For patients with flexion instability, there is a paucity of literature on the effectiveness of nonoperative management, and series on revision TKAs are limited. The purpose of this study is to evaluate effectiveness and prognostic factors of nonoperative management of flexion instability, and report survivorship, clinical outcomes, and radiographic results after revision TKA for flexion instability. METHODS: We identified 218 patients with flexion instability after primary TKA through our total joint registry between 1990 and 2019. Mean age was 66 years, 59% were women, and 58% had a cruciate-retaining (CR) implant. Initially, 152 patients (70%) were treated nonoperatively. First-time revision TKA was ultimately performed in 173 patients. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was calculated. Knee Society Scores and radiographs were reviewed. Mean follow-up was 6 years. RESULTS: Of the 152 patients treated nonoperatively, 66% reported no improvement. Patients with a CR design (hazard ratio [HR] 3.3, P < .001), inflammatory arthritis (HR 1.6, P = .03), smokers (HR 2.1, P = .04), and patient-reported instability (HR 3.8, P < .001) or effusions (HR 3.5, P < .001) were more likely to undergo revision. Of the 173 revised, the 10-year survivorship free of any re-revision was 87% with recurrent flexion instability (7), global instability (3), and infection (3) being most common. Knee Society Scores improved from 50 to 65 (P = .14). At final follow-up, all implants were well-fixed. CONCLUSION: In this large series of flexion instability after primary TKA, nonoperative management led to improvement in one third. Patients with a CR design or with patient-reported instability and/or effusions were most likely to undergo revision. Revision TKA demonstrated modest 10-year functional improvements and good survivorship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (retrospective), Therapeutic.

Making a Joint Decision Regarding the Timing of Surgery for Elective Arthroplasty Surgery After Being Infected With COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a substantial number of patients to have their elective arthroplasty surgeries rescheduled. While it is established that patients with COVID-19 who are undergoing surgery have a significantly higher risk of experiencing postoperative complications and mortality, it is not well-known at what time after testing positive the risk of postoperative complications or mortality returns to normal. METHODS: PubMed (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE, and professional society websites were systematically reviewed on March 7, 2022 to identify studies and guidelines on the optimal timeframe to reschedule patients for elective surgery after preoperatively testing positive for COVID-19. Outcomes included postoperative complications such as mortality, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, and pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies and professional society guidelines met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Patients with asymptomatic COVID-19 should be rescheduled 4-8 weeks after testing positive (as long as they do not develop symptoms in the interim), patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 should be rescheduled 6-8 weeks after testing positive (with complete resolution of symptoms), and patients with severe/critical COVID-19 should be rescheduled at a minimum of 12 weeks after hospital discharge (with complete resolution of symptoms). CONCLUSIONS: Given the negative association between preoperative COVID-19 and postoperative complications, patients should have elective arthroplasty surgery rescheduled at differing timeframes based on their symptoms. In addition, a multidisciplinary and patient-centered approach to rescheduling patients is recommended. Further study is needed to examine the impact of novel COVID-19 variants and vaccination on timeframes for rescheduling surgery.

The Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroids in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Direct Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are commonly used intraoperatively to treat pain and reduce opioid consumption and nausea associated with primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in primary TJA to support the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Hip Society, Knee Society, and the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Management. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for studies published before February 2020 on corticosteroids in TJA. All included studies underwent qualitative and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids. RESULTS: Critical appraisal of 1,581 publications revealed 23 studies regarded as the best available evidence for analysis. Intraoperative dexamethasone reduces postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and nausea and vomiting. Multiple doses lead to further reduction in pain, opioid consumption, nausea and vomiting. There is insufficient evidence on the risk of adverse events with perioperative dexamethasone in TJA. CONCLUSION: Strong evidence supports the use of a single dose or multiple doses of intravenous dexamethasone to reduce postoperative pain, opioid consumption, nausea and vomiting after primary TJA. There is insufficient evidence on perioperative dexamethasone in primary TJA to determine the optimal dose, number of doses, or risk of postoperative adverse events.

The Efficacy and Safety of Periarticular Injection in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Direct Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Periarticular injection (PAI) is administered intraoperatively to help reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption after primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PAI in primary TJA to support the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Hip Society, Knee Society, and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for studies published prior to March 2020 on PAI in TJA. All included studies underwent qualitative and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of PAI. RESULTS: Three thousand six hundred and ninety nine publications were critically appraised to provide 60 studies regarded as the best available evidence for an analysis. The meta-analysis showed that intraoperative PAI reduces postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Adding ketorolac or a corticosteroid to a long-acting local anesthetic (eg, ropivacaine or bupivacaine) provides an additional benefit. There is no difference between liposomal bupivacaine and other nonliposomal long-acting local anesthetics. Morphine does not provide any additive benefit in postoperative pain and opioid consumption and may increase postoperative nausea and vomiting. There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the use of epinephrine and clonidine. CONCLUSION: Strong evidence supports the use of a PAI with a long-acting local anesthetic to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Adding a corticosteroid and/or ketorolac to a long-acting local anesthetic further reduces postoperative pain and may reduce opioid consumption. Morphine has no additive effect and there is insufficient evidence on epinephrine and clonidine.

The Efficacy and Safety of Regional Nerve Blocks in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Direct Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Regional nerve blocks are widely used in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regional nerve blocks after TKA in support of the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Hip Society, Knee Society, and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Management. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published before March 24, 2020 on femoral nerve block, adductor canal block, and infiltration between Popliteal Artery and Capsule of Knee in primary TKA. All included studies underwent qualitative and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of the regional nerve blocks compared to a control, local peri-articular anesthetic infiltration (PAI), or between regional nerve blocks. RESULTS: Critical appraisal of 1,673 publications yielded 56 publications representing the best available evidence for analysis. Femoral nerve and adductor canal blocks are effective at reducing postoperative pain and opioid consumption, but femoral nerve blocks are associated with quadriceps weakness. Use of a continuous compared to single shot adductor canal block can improve postoperative analgesia. No difference was noted between an adductor canal block or PAI regarding postoperative pain and opioid consumption, but the combination of both may be more effective. CONCLUSION: Single shot adductor canal block or PAI should be used to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption following TKA. Use of a continuous adductor canal block or a combination of single shot adductor canal block and PAI may improve postoperative analgesia in patients with concern of poor postoperative pain control.

The Efficacy and Safety of Regional Nerve Blocks in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Direct Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Regional nerve blocks may be used as a component of a multimodal analgesic protocol to manage postoperative pain after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regional nerve blocks after THA in support of the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Hip Society, Knee Society, and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Management. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published prior to March 24, 2020 on fascia iliaca, lumbar plexus, and quadratus lumborum blocks in primary THA. All included studies underwent qualitative and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of the regional nerve blocks. RESULTS: An initial critical appraisal of 3,382 publications yielded 11 publications representing the best available evidence for an analysis. Fascia iliaca, lumbar plexus, and quadratus lumborum blocks demonstrate the ability to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Among the available comparisons, no difference was noted between a regional nerve block or local periarticular anesthetic infiltration regarding postoperative pain and opioid consumption. CONCLUSION: Local periarticular anesthetic infiltration should be considered prior to a regional nerve block due to concerns over the safety and cost of regional nerve blocks. If a regional nerve block is used in primary THA, a fascia iliaca block is preferred over other blocks due to the differences in technical demands and risks associated with the alternative regional nerve blocks.

Daily Dose of Preoperative Opioid Prescriptions Affects Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The use of preoperative opioids is associated with complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but the dosing threshold that constitutes this risk is not known. The purpose of this study was to identify the preoperative daily opioid dose associated with increased complications after primary TKA. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary TKA in the Humana claims database (2007-2016) with an opioid prescription within 3 months before surgery were identified. All opioids prescribed within 3 months before TKA were converted to milligram morphine equivalents. Patients were stratified based on daily opioid dose: tier 1) <10, tier 2) 10-25, tier 3) 25-50, tier 4) >50 milligram morphine equivalents. Patients were matched to opioid-naïve patients by comorbidities, age, and gender. Emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and surgical complications were compared. RESULTS: A total of 20,019 patients using preoperative opioids were identified and matched. ED visits and readmissions within 90 days were significantly higher in opioid users in all tiers (relative risk (RR) of ED visit: 1.25, 1.28, 1.34, and 1.25, respectively; readmission: 1.13, 1.17, 1.22, and 1.19, respectively). Rates of prosthetic joint infection were increased in opioid users in tiers 2, 3, and 4, and the risk increased in a dose-dependent manner (RR 1.37, 1.39, and 1.50, respectively). Patients in tier 4 had an increased risk of revision surgery (RR 1.44) at 2 years. CONCLUSION: Preoperative opioid use is associated with a dose-dependent increase in postoperative complications after TKA. Just two 5mg hydrocodone tablets daily lead to increased ED visits and readmission. Higher doses are associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection and revision surgery.