Elective Surgical Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms with Posterior Approach vs. Endovascular Exclusion: Early and Long Term Outcomes of Multicentre PARADE Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was compare elective surgical repair of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) via a posterior approach vs. endovascular exclusion, analysing early and five year outcomes in a multicentre retrospective study. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2023, a retrospectively maintained dataset of all consecutive asymptomatic PAAs that underwent open repair with posterior approach or endovascular repair in 37 centres was investigated. An aneurysm length of ≤ 60 mm was considered the only inclusion criterion. A total of 605 patients were included; 440 PAAs (72.7%) were treated via a posterior approach (open group) and the remaining 165 PAAs (27.3%) were treated using covered stents (Endo group). Continuous data were expressed as median with interquartile range. Thirty day outcomes were assessed and compared. At follow up, primary outcomes were freedom from re-intervention, secondary patency, and amputation free survival. Secondary outcomes were survival and primary patency. Estimated five year outcomes were compared using log rank test. RESULTS: At 30 days, no differences were found in major morbidity, mortality, graft occlusion, or re-interventions. Three patients (0.7%) in the open group experienced nerve injury. The overall median duration of follow up was 32.1 months. At five year follow up, freedom from re-intervention was higher in the open group (82.2% vs. 68.4%; p = .021). No differences were observed in secondary patency (open group 90.7% vs. endo group 85.2%; p = .25) or amputation free survival (open group 99.0% vs. endo group 98.4%; p = .73). A posterior approach was associated with better survival outcomes (84.4% vs. 79.4%; p = .050), and primary patency (79.8% vs. 63.8%; p = .012). CONCLUSION: Early and long term outcomes following elective repair of PAAs measuring ≤ 60 mm via a posterior approach or endovascular exclusion seem comparable. Nerve injury might be a rare but potential complication for those undergoing open surgery. Endovascular repair is associated with more re-interventions.

Posterior intra-articular distraction technique to treat pediatric atlantoaxial instability.

PURPOSE: Surgical treatment for atlantoaxial instability in pediatric patients is challenging. We report our experience with posterior intra-articular distraction technique in treating this disorder. METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive study which included 15 patients of atlantoaxial instability whose age was less than 16 years at the time of clinical presentation. All patients underwent anterior soft tissue released through a posterior-only approach, followed by intra-facet cage implantation, cantilever correction, and instrumentation. Clinical results were measured using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scale and radiographic measurements including the atlantodental interval (ADI), posterior atlantodental interval (pADI), the distance of odontoid tip above Chamberlain's line, clivuscanal angle (CCA), and triangular area (TA) of craniovertebral junction. RESULTS: The follow-up period ranged from 18 to 72 months, with an average of 41.2 ± 15.2 months. The JOA score increased from 13.6 ± 2.3 to 16.6 ± 0.8. ADI decreased from 4.31 ± 2.37 to 1.85 ± 1.09 mm, and TA decreased from 261.96 ± 107.99 to 197.12 ± 72.37 mm2. pADI increased from 12.89 ± 3.52 to 18.25 ± 3.89 mm, and CCA improved from 132.19 ± 16.34 to 144.35 ± 13.91°. All changes in measurements showed statistically significant. There were no evidence of surgery-related complications or iatrogenic secondary cervical deformity during follow-up. Radiological evaluation showed satisfactory corrections and bony fusions of C1-2 facet joint in all cases. CONCLUSION: Posterior intra-articular distraction followed by cage implantation and cantilever correction can be one of the safe and effective ways to solve atlantoaxial instability in pediatric patients.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of supercapsular percutaneously-assisted approach total hip arthroplasty versus conventional posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis was aimed to compare the postoperative clinical outcomes between the supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip (SuperPATH, SP) and conventional posterior/posterolateral approach (PA) for total hip arthroplasty in patients who have failed conservative treatment for hip-related disorders. METHODS: PRISMAP guidelines were followed in this systematic review. CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science databases and the reference list grey literature were searched for studies according to the search strategy. Endnote (version 20) was used to screen the searched studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criterias and extract the data from the eligible studied. RR and 95% CI were used for dichotomous variables and MD and 95% CI were used for continuous variables. All analyses and heterogeneity of outcomes were analysed by Review Manage (version 5.4). Publication bias of included studies was analysed by Stata (version 16.0). RESULTS: Thirty-six randomized control studies were included. Compared to PA group, SP group had a shorter incision length, less intraoperative blood loss, a shorter length of hospital stay and do activities earlier. Hip function (HHS) was significantly improved within three months postoperatively. Pain of hip (VAS) was significantly reduced within one month postoperatively. The state of daily living (BI) was significantly improved within three months. Patients' overall health status (SF-36) improved significantly postoperatively. There was no difference in postoperative complications between the two approaches. PA had a shorter operative time and a higher accuracy of prosthesis placement. CONCLUSION: The advantages of SuperPATH include accelerated functional recovery and less trauma associated with surgery. However, it required a longer operative time and implantation of the prosthesis was less accurate than that of PA.

The Surgical Approach Impacts Component Selection in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched Cohort Study of 7,460 Hips.

BACKGROUND: A higher risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been reported for the posterior approach (PA) compared to the anterior approach (AA). Dual mobility implants, larger head sizes, and elevated or face-changing liners can reduce the risk for dislocation. It remains unclear whether the component selection is influenced by the surgical approach. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 7,048 patients who underwent 7,460 primary THA with either AA or PA for primary hip osteoarthritis or osteonecrosis of the femoral head between 2019 and 2021. A propensity score model based on age, body mass index, height, and American Association of Anesthesiologists Score was applied. There were 2,502 AA-THA matched with 4,958 PA-THA (2,456 1:2, and 46 1:1). Groups were compared with multiple linear regression analyses/multivariate logistic regressions after controlling for American Association of Anesthesiologists Score and body mass index. In a second step, only hips operated by surgeons using both approaches were matched 1:1 (1,204 PA and AA, respectively). The same statistics were performed after controlling for "surgeon". RESULTS: The PA was associated with a more frequent use of dual mobility implants, elevated liners, face-changing liners, as well as heads with 36 mm or larger diameters, and the implanted cups were significantly larger (P < .001, respectively). These findings were consistent for both matched cohorts. CONCLUSION: The surgical approach impacts the component selection in THA. Patients undergoing PA-THA are more likely to receive implants with larger head size or stabilizing features compared to AA-THA.

Characteristics and Quality of Online Searches for Direct Anterior Versus Posterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Online resources are important for patient self-education and reflect public interest. We described commonly asked questions regarding the direct anterior versus posterior approach (DAA, PA) to total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the quality of associated websites. METHODS: We extracted the top 200 questions and websites in Google's "People Also Ask" section for 8 queries on January 8, 2023, and grouped websites and questions into DAA, PA, or comparison. Questions were categorized using Rothwell's classification (fact, policy, value) and THA-relevant subtopics. Websites were evaluated by information source, Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Criteria (credibility), DISCERN survey (information quality), and readability. RESULTS: We included 429 question/website combinations (questions: 52.2% DAA, 21.2% PA, 26.6% comparison; websites: 39.0% DAA, 11.0% PA, 9.6% comparison). Per Rothwell's classification, 56.2% of questions were fact, 31.7% value, 10.0% policy, and 2.1% unrelated. The THA-specific question subtopics differed between DAA and PA (P < .001), specifically for recovery timeline (DAA 20.5%, PA 37.4%), indications/management (DAA 13.4%, PA 1.1%), and technical details (DAA 13.8%, PA 5.5%). Information sources differed between DAA (61.7% medical practice/surgeon) and PA websites (44.7% government; P < .001). The median Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark score was 1 (limited credibility, interquartile range 1 to 2), with the lowest scores for DAA websites (P < .001). The median DISCERN score was 55 ("good" quality, interquartile range 43 to 65), with the highest scores for comparison websites (P < .001). Median Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores were 12th grade level for both DAA and PA (P = .94). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' informational interests can guide counseling. Internet searches that explicitly compare THA approaches yielded websites that provide higher-quality information. Providers may also advise patients that physician websites and websites only describing the DAA may have less balanced perspectives, and limited information regarding surgical approaches is available from social media resources.

Surgeons Experience Greater Physiologic Stress and Strain in the Direct Anterior Approach Than the Posterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterior approach (PA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have advantages and disadvantages, but their physiologic burden to the surgeon has not been quantified. This study was conducted to determine whether differences exist in surgeon physiological stress and strain during DAA in comparison to PA. METHODS: We evaluated a prospective cohort of 144 consecutive cases (67 DAA and 77 PA). There were 5, high-volume, fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons who wore a smart-vest that recorded cardiorespiratory data while performing primary THA DAA or PA. Heart rate (beats/minute), stress index (correlates with sympathetic activations), respiratory rate (respirations/minute), minute ventilation (L/min), and energy expenditure (calories) were recorded, along with patient body mass index and operative time. Continuous data was compared using t-tests or Mann Whitney U tests, and categorical data was compared with Chi-square or Fischer's exact tests. RESULTS: There were no differences in patient characteristics. Compared to PA, performing THA via DAA had a significantly higher surgeon stress index (17.4 versus 12.4; P < .001), heart rate (101 versus 98.3; P = .007), minute ventilation (21.7 versus 18.7; P < .001), and energy expenditure per hour (349 versus 295; P < .001). However, DAA had a significantly shorter operative time (71.4 versus 82.1; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons experience significantly higher physiological stress and strain when performing DAA compared to PA for primary THA. This study provides objective data on energy expenditure that can be factored into choice of approach, case order, and scheduling preferences, and provides insight into the work done by the surgeon.

The Impact of Surgical Approach on 90-Day Prosthetic Joint Infection After Total Hip Replacement - A Population-Based, Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to determine if the anterior approach (AP) influenced the incidence of early PJI in THA compared to posterior approach (PP). METHODS: Record linkage was performed between state-wide hospitalization data and a national joint replacement registry to identify unilateral THA performed via the AP or PP. Complete data on 12,605 AP and 25,569 PP THAs were obtained. Propensity score matching (PSM) was undertaken to match covariates between the approaches. Outcomes were the 90-day PJI hospital readmission rate(using narrow and broad definitions) and 90-day PJI revision rate (defined as component removal or exchange). RESULTS: The raw PJI readmission rate for AP was lower than PP (0.8% versus 1.1%, respectively). In the PSM analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in PJI readmission rate between approaches using narrow or broad definition of PJI readmission. In terms of revision for infection, both methods showed AP had a significantly lower rate than PP, with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30, 0.75) for the 1:1 nearest neighbor method and 0.50 (95% CI 0.32, 0.77) for the subclassification method. CONCLUSION: After addressing known confounders, there was no significant difference in the 90-day hospital readmission rate for hip PJI between approaches. There was a significantly reduced 90-day PJI revision rate for AP. The difference in revision may reflect differences in the surgical management of PJI between hip approaches rather than a difference in the underlying rate of infection.

Comparison of Early Postoperative Step and Stair Counts With the Direct Anterior Approach Versus the Posterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of direct anterior approach (DAA) or posterior approach (PA) on step and stair counts after total hip arthroplasty using a remotely monitored mobile application with a smartwatch while controlling for baseline characteristics. METHODS: This is a secondary data analysis from a prospective cohort study of patients utilizing a smartphone-based care management platform. The primary outcomes were step and stair counts and changes from baseline through one year. Step and stair counts were available for 1,501 and 847 patients, respectively. Longitudinal regression models were created to control for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Patients in the DAA group had significantly lower body mass index (P = .049) and comorbidities (P = .028), but there were no significant differences in age (P = .225) or sex (P = .315). The DAA patients had a higher average and improvement from baseline in step count at 2 and 3 weeks postoperatively after controlling for patient characteristics (P = .028 and P = .044, respectively). The average stair counts were higher for DAA patients at one month postoperatively (P = .035), but this difference was not significant after controlling for patient demographics. Average stair ascending speeds and changes from baseline were not different between DAA and PA patients. Descending stair speed was higher at 2 weeks postoperatively for DAA patients, but was no longer higher after controlling for baseline demographics. CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for baseline characteristics, DAA patients demonstrate earlier improvement in step count than PA patients after total hip arthroplasty. However, patient selection and surgeon training may continue to influence outcomes through a surgical approach.

Does the Primary Surgical Approach Matter When Choosing the Approach for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Multiple surgical approaches are used for primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). This study sought to investigate prevalence of discordance of pTHA and rTHA surgical approaches and to evaluate how approach concordance impacts postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent rTHA from 2000 to 2021 was conducted at 3 large urban academic centers. Patients who had minimum 1-year follow-up post-rTHA were included and grouped based on whether they received pTHA via a posterior (PA), direct anterior (DA), or laterally based (DL) approach, and by concordance of index rTHA approach with their pTHA approach. Of the 917 patients studied, 839 (91.5%) were included in the concordant cohort and 78 (8.5%) in the discordant cohort. Patient demographics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Discordance was most prevalent in the DA-pTHA subset (29.5%), compared to the DL-pTHA subset (14.7%) or PA-pTHA subset (3.7%). Discordance varied significantly between primary approaches among all revisions, with DA-pTHA patients having the highest discordance rate for patients revised for aseptic loosening (46.3%, P < .001), fracture (22.2%, P < .001), and dislocation (33.3%, P < .001). There were no differences between groups in dislocation rate, re-revision for infection, or re-revision for fracture. CONCLUSION: The results of this multicenter study showed patients who received pTHA via the DA were more likely to receive rTHA via a discordant approach compared to other primary approaches. Since approach concordance did not impact dislocation, infection, or fracture rates after rTHA, surgeons can feel reassured using a separate approach for rTHA. LEVEL III EVIDENCE: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Complications and Survivorship After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Is There a Difference by Surgical Approach?

BACKGROUND: Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) has traditionally been performed through the posterolateral approach (PA). Anterior approaches (AA) for rTHA are increasingly being utilized. The purpose of this study was to compare complications and survivorship from re-revision and reoperation after aseptic rTHA performed using an AA versus a PA. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent aseptic rTHA either through an AA (direct anterior approach [DAA], anterior-based muscle sparing [ABMS]) or PA from January 2017 to December 2021. There were 116 patients who underwent AA-rTHA (DAA 50, ABMS 66) or PA-rTHA (n = 105). Patient demographics, complications, and postoperative outcomes were collected. RESULTS: The most common indication in both groups was aseptic loosening (n = 26, 22.4% AA, n = 28, 26.7% PA). Acetabular revision alone was most common in the AA group (n = 33, 28.4%), while both components were most commonly revised in the PA groups (n = 47, 44.8%). In all the AA-rTHA group, the index total hip arthroplasty was performed through a PA in 51% of patients, while the PA-rTHA group had the index procedure performed via AA in 4.8%. There was no statistically significant difference in re-revision rate between the DAA, ABMS, or PA groups (9.55 versus 5.3% versus 11.4%, respectively, P = .11). The most common overall reason for re-revision was persistent instability, with no difference in incidence of postoperative hip dislocation (n = 4, 6.8% DAA, n = 3, 5.3%, n = 10, 9.5% PA; P = .31). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no difference in complication or re-revision survivorship after aseptic rTHA performed through a DAA, ABMS approach, or PA, nor between anterior or posterior-based approaches. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Comparison of conjoined tendon-preserving posterior approach and conventional posterolateral approach in hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture in the elderly: A multicenter (TRON group) retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Femoral neck fractures (FNF) are one of the most common traumatic injuries in the elderly. The conjoined tendon-preserving posterior (CPP) approach was developed as a modification of the conventional posterolateral (PL) approach in hemiarthroplasty (HA) for displaced femoral neck fractures (FNF) to reduce postoperative dislocation. We hypothesized that the CPP approach would result in fewer dislocations and similar functional and radiographic outcomes compared to the PL approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter (TRON group) study. We evaluated the rate of complications, and functional and radiographic outcomes for patients aged >65 years who underwent HA via the PL approach or the CPP approach from 2017 to 2019 and followed up for at least 24 months. To adjust for baseline differences between the groups, a propensity score-matching algorithm was used in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: We identified 135 patients who underwent HA via the PL approach and 135 patients via the CPP approach. The mean follow-up period was 32.4 ± 14.0 months. The incidence of dislocation was 6 in 135 patients (4.4%) in the PL group and 0 in 135 patients (0%) in the CPP group, and there was significant difference (p = 0.04). Operation time was equivalent between the two groups (73.1 ± 30.4 vs. 71.8 ± 30.0 min; p = 0.72). The rate of varus insertion of stems in the PL group lower than that in the CPP group (19.3% vs. 33.3%; p = 0.01). Postoperative Parker's mobility score was similar between the two groups at 12 months follow-up (6.17 vs. 6.27; p = 0.81). CONCLUSION: The CPP approach showed a significantly lower dislocation rate, similar functional outcome and more varus stem insertions compared with the PL approach in this retrospective study.

Open reduction and internal fixation of crescent fracture-dislocation: anterior or posterior approach?

INTRODUCTION: To date, the approach that prevails in the open reduction and internal fixation of crescent fracture-dislocations (CFD) remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of CFD treated via the anterior or posterior approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 64 cases of CFDs openly reduced through an anterior (group A, n = 31) or a posterior (group B, n = 33) approach were retrospectively analyzed. Functional results, reduction quality, residual displacements in the axial and coronal planes, pelvic asymmetry deformity, and correlations between Day's classification were compared. Complications and fracture union were also recorded. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. RESULTS: The functional scores were similar between the two groups, and all fractures achieved good or excellent reduction postoperatively. In the coronal plane, the excellent/good ratio in group B was higher than in group A. The mean residual displacement in the coronal plane was significantly higher in group A than in group B, with group A showing greater displacement in both planes for Day I fractures and in the coronal plane for Day II fractures. The residual displacement in both planes for Day III fractures was comparable between the groups. The pelvic asymmetry deformity was equal between the two groups and among the different Day's fracture types. CONCLUSIONS: Open reduction and internal fixation of CFDs obtained satisfactory outcomes through an anterior or posterior approach. The posterior approach achieved a better sacroiliac joint reduction. The optimal indication for the posterior approach was a Day I fracture, followed by a Day II fracture. No correlation was found between the surgical approach and reduction quality in Day III fractures.

Improved patient reported outcomes with the direct anterior approach versus the posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty in the early post-operative period.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) with the direct anterior approach (DAA) may experience faster recovery but may also have better baseline health than those who undergo THA with the posterior approach (PA). This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between the DAA and PA while controlling for baseline factors. METHODS: This is a secondary data analysis from a prospective cohort study of patients utilizing a smartphone-based care management platform following THA. The primary outcomes were HOOS JR and EQ-5D-5L through 1 year and change from baseline. Longitudinal regression models were created to control for baseline characteristics and investigate the impact of surgical approach on PROMs. RESULTS: Of 1364 THAs evaluated, 731 (53.6%) were female, and 840 (61.6%) used the PA. Patients in the PA group were of similar age but had higher body mass index and comorbidity scores. Pre-operative HOOS JR and EQ-5D-5L were comparable, but higher post-operatively in the DAA group through 6 months (p = 0.03 and p = 0.005). At 1 year post-operatively, HOOS JR and EQ-5D-5L did not vary between groups (p = 0.48 and p = 0.56), nor did changes from baseline (p = 0.47 and p = 0.11). After controlling baseline characteristics, DAA was significantly associated with higher average HOOS JR through 6 months (p = 0.03) and EQ-5D-5L through 3 months (p = 0.005), but not at 12 months (p = 0.89 and p = 0.56). CONCLUSION: THA patients undergoing DAA demonstrate earlier improvements in HOOS JR and EQ-5D-5L. However, these differences may not be clinically significant and are not evident at 1-year post-operative. Patient selection and surgeon training may continue to affect outcomes by surgical approach.

Joint awareness among total hip arthroplasty patients operated through anterior approach versus posterior approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare joint awareness in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) via the anterior approach (AA) versus the posterior approach (PA). The hypothesis was that patients who underwent THA via AA would have better forgetfulness of the artificial joint. METHODS: A comprehensive search of major literature databases and bibliographic details was conducted to identify studies evaluating the forgotten joint score (FJS-12) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients operated through the anterior approach (AA) and posterior approach (PA). Out of 234 studies identified, seven studies met the inclusion criteria for review. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and the risk of bias in the included studies. The FJS-12 was evaluated at three months, one year, and beyond 2 years. RESULTS: The mean FJS-12 at > 2 years was 82.03 in the AA group and 80.32 in the PA group. The forest plot analysis (n = 819 patients) revealed no significant difference in FJS-12 score between these two approaches (MD 2.13, 95% CI [- 1.17, 5.42], p = 0.21; I2 = 60%). However, the joint awareness was significantly lesser in the AA group at 3 months (MD 12.56, 95% CI [9.58, 15.54], p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%) and 1 year (MD 9.55, 95% CI [7.85, 11.24], p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: After analyzing the available literature, it was found that THA patients operated through the AA approach have significantly lower joint awareness than those operated through the PA approach in the first year of surgery. However, there is no significant difference in joint awareness between these two approaches after 2 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Cervical spine fractures in ankylosing spondylitis patients: an analysis of the presentation and clinical results of 110 surgically managed patients in two spine centers.

PURPOSE: In this work, a two-center study was performed to study the clinical presentation of cervical spine fractures in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients and assess the surgical management of these fractures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in two level-1 spine surgery centers was performed. Both spine centers have a standard database for all admitted patients. Inclusion criteria were surgically treated AS with cervical spine fracture diagnosis (from C1 to Th3) and postoperative follow-up minimum of 12 months. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients (105 male/5 female) were included. The mean age was 62 ± 10 years. The mean time between trauma and surgery was 49 ± 42 days. There was a history of mild trauma in 72 patients (65.4%). The clinical presentation was a pain in all patients. Twenty-seven (24.6%) had a neurological deficit at admission. The most common fracture level was C6/7 in 63 patients (57.23%). The VAS was 7 ± 1, and NDI was 34 ± 8 in the preoperative assessment. The mean preoperative kyphosis angle was 48 ± 26° between C2 and C7. Positioning and preparing of the patients on the operation table took a mean of 57 ± 28 min. The surgical approach was dorsal in 59 patients (53.6%), combined in 45 patients (40.9%), and ventral in 6 patients (6,5%). The mean number of the fixed levels was 6 ± 2 levels. Intraoperative complications occurred in 9 patients (8.2%). Postoperative Cobb angle improved to a mean of 17 ± 9 degrees. Neurological improvement occurred in 20/27 patients. In 12 patients, the recovery was complete. The mean postoperative follow-up was 46 ± 18 months. VAS improved to 3 ± 1, and NDI improved to 14 ± 6 at the last postoperative visit. The improvement was clinically significant (p = 0.01 and 0.00, respectively). CONCLUSION: High suspicion of cervical spine fractures is necessary for patients with AS. CT and MRI images are necessary to rule out cervical spine fractures in AS patients, especially to detect occult fractures. Surgical treatment is safe, and the posterior approach with long-segment fusion is the approach of choice in this group of patients.

Does Surgical Approach to the Hip Play a Role in Same-Day Discharge Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Different approaches for total hip arthroplasty (THA) may offer advantages in regard to achieving same-day-discharge (SDD) success. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent elective primary THA from 2015 to 2020 who were formally enrolled in a single institution's SDD program. A total of 1,127 and 207 patients underwent THA via direct anterior approach and posterior approach, respectively, were included. Cohorts were assigned based on approach. The primary outcome was failure-to-launch, defined as hospital stay extending past 1 midnight. Secondary outcomes included Forgotten Joint Score-12, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, 90-day readmission and revision rate, and surgical time. Patient-reported outcomes were collected at 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic differences, posterior approach patients had higher rates of failure-to-launch (12.1% versus 5.9%, P = .002) and longer surgical times (99 versus 80 minutes; P < .001) compared to direct anterior approach patients. The cohorts had similar readmission (1.7% versus 1.4%; P = .64) and revision rates (1% versus 1%; P = .88). The magnitude of improvement in Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement scores from preoperative to 12 months was similar between cohorts (35.3 versus 34.5; P = .42). The differences in outcome scores between cohorts at each time point were not considered clinically significant. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that patient selection and surgical approach may be important for achieving SDD. Surgical approach did not significantly impact readmission or revision rates nor did it have a meaningful impact on patient-reported outcomes in the first year after surgery.

Large Femoral Heads and Select Dual-Mobility Bearings Are Associated With Reduced Instability in Contemporary Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative dislocation is considered the main drawback of posterior approach total hip arthroplasty (THA). Thinner highly cross-linked polyethylene and dual-mobility bearings allow maximizing femoral head diameter per a given cup size. This study evaluated dislocation rates as large femoral head bearings were introduced into a practice over an 11-year period. METHODS: A total of 1,511 consecutive primary THAs were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, implant sizes, femoral head-acetabular cup ratio, and dislocation status were collected from the electronic medical record. Data were evaluated using time series analysis techniques as larger femoral heads, thinner polyethylene liners, and dual-mobility bearings were introduced. The cohort was 57% women with mean age and body mass index of 62 years (range, 13 to 93) and 31 kg/m2 (range, 13 to 54), respectively. RESULTS: The overall dislocation rate was 0.98%. Use of femoral head sizes ≥ 40 millimeters increased from 4% in the years 2010 to 2016 to 51% in the years 2017 to 2021, correlating with a 50% reduction in dislocation rate from 1.4% to 0.7% (P = .279). Also, no dislocations occurred in patients who had dual-mobility bearings or ≥ 40-millimeter femoral heads (P = .007). Twelve of 14 dislocations occurred in cases with head-cup ratio < 0.7 (P = .013). Thirteen of 14 dislocations were in women (P = .005). CONCLUSION: Maximizing the femoral head diameter per given cup size correlated with a decrease in dislocation rate in modern posterior approach THA. Furthermore, these results suggest that dual-mobility articulations should be reserved for high-risk patients or patients in whom a 40-millimeter femoral head is not possible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV-consecutive case series; no control group.

Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Utilizing a Monoblock Dual-Mobility Construct Without Posterior Hip Precautions: A Series of 580 Hips With One Dislocation.

BACKGROUND: Instability remains a devastating complication following total hip arthroplasty. Here we describe a mini-posterior approach with a monoblock dual-mobility implant without "traditional posterior hip precautions" yielding excellent results. METHODS: There were 580 consecutive hips in 575 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty utilizing a monoblock dual-mobility implant and a mini-posterior approach. With this technique, the acetabular component positioning does not rely on tradition intra-operative radiographic abduction and anteversion goals but rather uses patient-specific anatomic landmarks (anterior acetabular rim and, when visible, the transverse acetabular ligament) to set cup position; stability is assessed with a significant, dynamic intra-operative test of range of motion. Patients' mean age was 64 years (range, 21 to 94), and 53.7% were women. RESULTS: Mean abduction was 48.4° (range, 29° to 68°) and mean anteversion was 24.7° (range, -1° to 51°). Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores improved in every measured domain from preoperative to final postoperative visit. There were seven (1.2%) patients who required reoperation, with mean time to reoperation of 1.3 months (range, one to 176 days). Only one patient (0.2%) who had a preoperative history of spinal cord injury and Charcot arthropathy dislocated. CONCLUSION: A posterior approach hip surgeon may want to consider using a monoblock dual-mobility construct and avoidance of traditional posterior hip precautions to achieve early hip stability with an extremely low dislocation rate and high patient satisfaction scores.

Complication Rate After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Using the Posterior Approach and Enabling Technology: A Consecutive Series of 2,888 Hips.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a safe and effective procedure; however, complications such as dislocation, fracture, and infection still occur. It is still unclear whether the dislocation rate via the posterior approach (PA) is better, equal, or worse than the direct anterior approach. Our aim was to report the primary THA dislocation rate via the PA using enabling technology in a large consecutive series of patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 2,888 primary THAs were reviewed at a single, high-volume, academic institution from January 2018 to September 2021. All patients underwent a THA by 4 fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons through the PA with enabling technology. Overall dislocation and readmission rates within 90 days and up to 3 years were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 2,888 procedures, a total of 39 patients had complications related to the surgery during the 3-year follow-up period. There were 10 patients (0.35%) who experienced a dislocation, with half undergoing surgical revision. Of the 39 patients who experienced complications, 37 (1.3%) were readmitted and 2 underwent revision during their hospital stay. Postoperative periprosthetic fractures were the most common cause for readmission and reoperation at a rate of 0.52% and 0.52%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The dislocation rate of 0.35% is one of the lowest reported rates via the PA at a mean follow up of 2.1 years and is comparable to previously published rates using alternate approaches. Using contemporary THA with enabling technology, the PA is a reliable approach with respect to dislocation and complication rates after primary THA.

Surgical Approach Does Not Affect Chronic Opioid Usage After Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Three different surgical approaches (the direct anterior, antero-lateral, and posterior) are commonly used for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Due to an internervous and intermuscular approach, the direct anterior approach may result in less postoperative pain and opioid use, although all 3 approaches have similar outcomes 5 years after surgery. Perioperative opioid medication consumption poses a dose-dependent risk of long-term opioid use. We hypothesized that the direct anterior approach is associated with less opioid usage over 180 days after surgery than the antero-lateral or posterior approaches. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed including 508 patients (192 direct anterior, 207 antero-lateral, and 109 posterior approaches). Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were identified from the medical records. The state prescription database was used to determine opioid use 90 days before and 1 year after THA. Regression analyses controlling for sex, race, age, and body mass index were used to determine the effect of surgical approach on opioid use over 180 days after surgery. RESULTS: No difference was seen in the proportion of long-term opioid users based on approach (P = .78). There was no significant difference in the distribution of opioid prescriptions filled between surgical approach groups in the year after surgery (P = .35). Not taking opioids 90 days prior to surgery, regardless of approach, was associated with a 78% decrease in the odds of becoming a chronic opioid user (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Opioid use prior to surgery, rather than THA surgical approach, was associated with chronic opioid consumption following THA.