A Systematic Review of Retracted Publications in Clinical Orthopaedic Research.

BACKGROUND: Retracted publications are an often-overlooked issue affecting the scientific community, and recent data confirms the overall number of retracted publications is rising. While this has previously been looked at within orthopaedic surgery, a contemporary understanding of retractions is required due to the rapid expansion in publications. Our study aimed to assess the retracted publications within clinical orthopaedic research to evaluate for characteristics and trends. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on December 14, 2023, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. There were 4 databases that were queried to identify retracted publications in clinical orthopaedics that assessed operative and nonoperative orthopaedic interventions (excluding basic science). Articles were independently screened by 2 reviewers; those meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated for various characteristics, including reasons for retraction based on Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines. RESULTS: There were 233 studies that met the inclusion criteria and were retracted between January 1, 1990, and December 14, 2023. Clinical orthopaedics represented 1.18% of all retracted publications identified through PubMed over this period. There were 87 articles that were retracted in 2023, up from 17 in 2022 (a 412% increase). Retracted studies were published in journals with 2022 impact factors up to 9.3, with an average of 3.1 (SD [standard deviation] 1.9). A total of 39.5% of the retracted studies were published in orthopaedic journals, and 60.9% of the retracted articles were published in exclusively open-access journals. The mean time from electronic publication to retraction was 2.1 years (SD 2.2). Retracted articles have been cited up to 180 times (mean 8.6; SD 20). Reasons for retraction included misconduct (45.9%), plagiarism (11.6%), redundant publication (11.6%), unethical research (10.3%), error (9.4%), and others (10.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of retractions in the clinical orthopaedic literature is increasing. Clinical research is the basis for clinical practice guidelines, the gold standard for informing medical decision-making. Retractions may be one harbinger of lower-quality publications; researchers, institutions, and journals together play important roles in maintaining scientific integrity.

The comparison of postoperative outcomes in Morton's neuroma excision between plantar versus dorsal approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current literature lacks comprehensive information comparing the clinical outcomes of plantar and dorsal approaches for Civinini-Morton syndrome, also known as Morton's neuroma. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of neurectomy for Morton's neuroma, focusing on the differences between the plantar and dorsal approach. METHODS: Our comprehensive literature review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and utilized databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Data investigated in this study included postoperative sensory loss, scar tenderness, reoperation, histopathology, complications, pain score, patient satisfaction, functional scores, and time to weight bearing. RESULTS: Total eight studies were included in this study. In aggregate, 237 neuromas underwent excision using the plantar approach, while 312 neuromas were treated via the dorsal approach. A significantly higher rate of postoperative reduced sensory was found in the dorsal group: 48.5 % (64/132) Vs. 62.0 % (80/129) with the relative ratio (RR) of 0.79 (95 % CI, 0.64-0.97). A significantly higher rate of postoperative scar tenderness was noted in the plantar group: 16.7 % (32/192) Vs. 6.2 % (14/225) with the RR of 2.27 (95 % CI, 1.28-4.04). Regarding the histopathology, 99.3 % (143/144) and 97.1 % (134/138) accuracy rate was confirmed in the plantar approach and dorsal approach, respectively, with the RR of 1.02 (95 % CI, 0.98-1.07). Overall reoperations and complications were not different between groups at 5.3 % (10/189) and 8.8 % (19/216) in the plantar group versus 6.1 % and 12.0 % (35/291) in dorsal group. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend detailed discussions with patients prior to surgery to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each approach.

The Association of Season of Surgery and Patient Reported Outcomes following Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: Understanding the impact of situational variables on surgical recovery can improve outcomes in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Literature examining hospital outcomes by season remains inconclusive, with limited focus on patient experience. The aim of this study is to investigate if there are differences in hospital and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMS) after THA depending on the season of the index procedure to improve surgeon preoperative counseling. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing primary THA at a single large academic center between January 2013 and August 2020. Demographic, operative, hospital, and PROMs were gathered from the institutional electronic medical record and our institutional joint replacement outcomes database. Results: 6418 patients underwent primary THA and met inclusion criteria. Of this patient population, 1636 underwent surgery in winter, 1543 in spring, 1811 in summer, and 1428 in fall. PROMs were equivalent across seasons at nearly time points. The average age of patients was 65 (+/- 10) years, with an average BMI of 29.3 (+/- 6). Rates of complications including ED visits within 30 days, readmission within 90 days, unplanned readmission, dislocation, fracture, or wound infection were not significantly different by season (P > .05). Conclusion: Our findings indicate no differences in complications and PROMs at 1 year in patients undergoing THA during 4 distinct seasons. Notably, patients had functional differences at the second follow-up visit, suggesting variation in short-term recovery. Patients could be counseled that they have similar rates of complications and postoperative recovery regardless of season.

Do We Need Routine Postoperative Prophylactic Oral Antibiotics in Elective Foot and Ankle Surgery?

Background: Previous studies about antibiotic prophylaxis in foot and ankle surgery have focused on perioperative intravenous administration, with few studies reporting on the efficiency of postoperative oral antibiotics. The purpose of this study is to investigate differences in the rate of postoperative infection and wound complications between patients with and without postoperative oral antibiotics and to identify independent risk factors for these complications following foot and ankle surgeries. Methods: A retrospective review of all elective foot and ankle surgeries with at least a 6-month follow-up was performed over a 2-year time span. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on if they received postoperative oral antibiotics. We compared the rates of postoperative infections and wound complications between the 2 groups. The surgical site, the number of Current Procedural Terminology codes, and the number of surgical incisions were also noted. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors of postoperative infection and wound complications. Results: A total of 366 patients were included in this study-240 with antibiotics and 126 without antibiotics. There was no significant difference in the rates of postoperative infection and wound complications between the 2 groups. The rate of superficial infection, deep infection, and wound complications was 1.7%, 0.8%, and 5.8% in the antibiotic group vs 3.2%, 0.0%, and 4.0% in patients without antibiotics, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified independent risk factors of postoperative infection and wound complications as follows: smoking (OR: 4.7), male (OR: 4.0), history of neoplasm (OR: 6.7), and multiple incisions (OR: 4.1). Conclusion: Our results suggest that routine postoperative prophylactic oral antibiotics are not needed following elective foot and ankle surgeries. However, certain risk factors may increase the risk for postoperative infection and wound complications in foot and ankle surgery. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

The efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid utilization in total ankle arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is still a lack of information on the role of Tranexamic acid (TXA) in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). The purpose of this study is to comprehensively review, consolidate, and analyze findings from existing research on the effectiveness and safety of TXA in TAA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, for original, English-language studies investigating the efficacy and safety of TXA in TAA, through February 2023. Evaluated data for the meta-analysis included estimated blood loss (EBL), change in perioperative hemoglobin, need for transfusion, and complications including DVT/PE, and wound complications. RESULTS: A total of nine studies were included in this study. In total, 450 TAA were included, with 244 receiving TXA (54.2%) and 206 not receiving TXA (45.8%). TXA in TAA significantly decreased EBL. A significantly lower rate of wound complications in the TXA group with the relative risk (RR) of 0.51. We classified wound complications into wound infection and delayed wound healing/dehiscence. A significant decrease in the rate of wound infection and a tendency showing a decrease in the rate of delayed wound healing/dehiscence in the TXA group were noted: the RR of 0.29, and 0.63, respectively. TXA did not increase the incidence of DVT/PE following TAA. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the utilization of TXA during TAA demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in EBL and relative risk for wound complications. However, further RCTs with larger sample sizes will be necessary to establish a more robust conclusion regarding the efficacy and safety of TXA in TAA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review and meta-analysis.

No Difference in Range of Motion, Components, or Complications Following Conversion of Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty Compared to Manual TKA After Undergoing Manual or Robotic-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.

Background: Conversion surgery from unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a challenge due to scarring, implant/cement removal, and loss of bony landmarks. Robotic-assisted (RA) TKA may assist in challenges seen in manual conversion TKA. The aim of this study is to identify if there are differences in components and functional outcomes dependent on manual/RA primary UKA and conversion TKA. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing conversion from UKA to TKA over a 10-year period at a single institution. Data extracted included surgical technique, reason for UKA failure, range of motion at 1 year, need for augments, and utilization of revision components. Results: Forty-nine patients (50 knees) with a UKA converted to a TKA were divided into 4 groups based on primary and conversion surgery: manual-to-manual (n = 11), manual-to-robot (n = 11), robot-to-manual (n = 11), and robot-to-robot (n = 17). There was no difference in need for augments (P = .376), size of poly (P = .23), postoperative flexion (P = .52), or extension (P = .76) at 1 year between the 4 groups. However, patients with primary manual UKA did require significantly more augments during revision (P = .032). Conclusions: Our study did not show any statistically significant differences of primary RA or manual UKA to RA or manual TKA in terms of range of motion at 1 year, complications, or differences in components. RA conversion from UKA to TKA is a new but equivalent technique to manual conversion. Primary surgery may impact the requirement for augments during conversion surgery.

Rural-Urban Differences in Hospital and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: Rural patients have unique health-care factors influencing outcomes of arthroplasty, hypothetically putting these patients at increased risk for complications following total joint arthroplasty. The aim of this study is to better understand differences in patient outcomes and satisfaction between rural and urban patients receiving care in an urban setting and to provide more equitable care. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty at a single large academic center between January 2013 and August 2020. Demographic, operative, and hospital outcomes were obtained from the institutional electronic medical record. Rurality was determined by rural-urban code (RUC) classifications by zip code with RUC codes 1-3 defined as urban and RUC 4-10 defined as rural. Results: Patients from urban areas were more likely to visit the emergency department within 30 days postoperatively (P = .006) and be readmitted within 90 days (P < .001). However, unplanned (P < .001) admissions were higher in the rural group. There was no statistical difference in postoperative complications (P = .4). At 6 months, rural patients had higher patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score total (P = .05), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score interval (P = .05), self-reported functional improvement (P < .05), improvements in pain (P < .05), and that the surgery met expectations (P < .05). However, these values did not reach minimal clinically important difference. Conclusions: There may be differences in emergency department visits, readmissions, and PROMs in rural vs urban populations undergoing total hip arthroplasty in an urban setting. Patient access to care and attitudes of rural patients toward health care may underlie these findings. Understanding differences in PROMs, satisfaction, and hospital-based outcomes based on rurality is essential to provide equitable arthroplasty care.

Comparing Orthopaedic Randomized Control Trials Published in High-Impact Medical and Orthopaedic Journals.

INTRODUCTION: Orthopaedic studies published in high-impact medical journals are often believed to have a high prevalence of negative or neutral results and possess methodological characteristics that may bias toward nonsurgical treatments. The purpose of this study was to compare study characteristics, methodologic quality, exposure, and outcome direction among orthopaedic randomized control trials (RCTs) published in high-impact medical and orthopaedic journals and to identify study attributes associated with greater impact. METHODS: RCTs published between January 2010 and December 2020 in the five medical journals and 10 orthopaedic journals with the highest 5-year impact factors were analyzed. Inclusion criteria were RCTs reporting on orthopaedic surgical intervention compared with nonsurgical or less-invasive surgical procedures. Study characteristics, methodologic quality (Jadad scale), outcomes, and altmetric data were collected. Primary outcomes were categorized as positive (favoring surgical/more-extensive surgery), negative (favoring nonsurgical/less-extensive surgery), or neutral. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight RCTs were analyzed; 26 from medical and 102 from orthopaedic journals. Studies published in medical journals included more authors ( P < 0.001), larger sample sizes ( P < 0.001), more institutions ( P < 0.001), and more often received funding ( P < 0.001). The average Jadad scale did not significantly differ between journals ( P = 0.14). The direction of the primary study outcome did not differ between journals ( P = 0.22). Average AAS and annual citation rates were higher in RCTs published in medical journals ( P < 0.001). Publication in a medical journal was the only covariate associated with higher annual citation rates ( P < 0.001) and AAS ( P < 0.001) on multivariable analyses. DISCUSSION: High-impact medical journals do not publish orthopaedic RCTs with negative or neutral findings at a rate that significantly differs from orthopaedic journals. However, the higher impact and digital coverage of the studies published in medical journals may disproportionally influence the practices of nonorthopaedic providers. Raising awareness of critical findings published in orthopaedic journals may be particularly important for improving healthcare policies and orthopaedic referral patterns for musculoskeletal problems.

Suture button fixation yields high levels of patient reported outcomes, return to sport, and stable fixation in isolated Lisfranc injuries: A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Lisfranc injuries remain a significant, but often misdiagnosed, orthopaedic injury. Alongside the traditional methods of surgical fixation, including arthrodesis and open reduction and internal fixation with screws, suture button fixation is an emerging technique. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of suture button fixation for treatment of Lisfranc injuries through a systematic review. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for original, English-language studies observing outcomes of Lisfranc injury until August 19, 2022. The clinical studies with evidence level I-IV and at least a 12 month follow-up after the index surgery were included if they examined quantifiable outcomes of Lisfranc injury treated with suture button. Articles were excluded if they included case reports, systematic reviews, comments, editorials, surveys, animal studies, or biomechanical/cadaveric studies. Variables extracted from text and figures include demographic information, return to sport measures, patient reported outcomes, and complications. FINDINGS: Of the 10 studies included, there were 186 total patients with an age range of 13-72. In every study, all patients were able to return to sport or activity with a return time averaging from 10.8 to 25.9 weeks. Postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores ranged from 83.5 to 97.0 while pain Visual Analogue Scale ranged from 0.6 to 2.5. Complications were reported in four studies at a rate of 7.7% including two cases of diastasis, two cases of paraesthesia, one case of button irritation, and one of postoperative degenerative joint disease, with no reported revisions. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In our systematic review, suture button fixation shows high levels of patient reported outcomes, return to sport, and stable fixation in isolated Lisfranc injuries. This surgical technique provides a physiologic reduction across the Lisfranc joint and reduces the need for reoperation including removal of hardware. However, further evidence such as large sample size high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the best treatment for Lisfranc injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.

Running Following Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

With improved implants and younger patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), there are increased expectations to return to high-impact activities. Recommendations regarding return to running following hip arthroplasty remain unclear. A search of the PubMed database was conducted, and all publications referencing running following THA or HRA published between January 1, 2000, and September 1, 2020, were included in the systematic review. Patient demographics, surgical variables, activity measures, and revision rates were recorded for each study. A total of 225 unique citations were identified, of which four manuscripts met the eligibility criteria. Eighty-nine of 121 (73.6%) preoperative runners returned to running postoperatively. All four studies reported mean postoperative UCLA activity scores of at least nine. More patients returned to running following HRA than THA with lower rates of revision. Further research with longer postoperative follow-up is necessary to provide definitive recommendations for running following arthroplasty procedures. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(1):001-004, 2023).

Late Hematogenous Total Hip Infection After Revision for Mechanically Assisted Crevice Corrosion With Adverse Local Tissue Reaction.

Mechanically assisted crevice corrosion (MACC) at the trunnion-bore junction of a total hip arthroplasty may cause adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) with inflammatory reaction and tissue necrosis. Complications, including acute infection, continued pain, and instability, are therefore common after a revision surgery for MACC. We now present 2 cases of late hematogenous bacterial infection years after revision for MACC and ALTR, a previously unreported outcome in this population. We hypothesize that MACC-induced tissue necrosis does not heal over time, and some patients with metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty treated for ALTR are at long-term risk of hematogenous bacterial infection.

Subscapularis repair techniques for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Repair of the subscapularis can be effective in the setting of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). However, there has yet to be a consensus on an optimal repair technique. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to consolidate current high-quality studies comparing outcomes after rTSA with different subscapularis repair techniques. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses using the PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane databases for original, English-language studies observing outcomes of rTSA after subscapularis repair published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2020. Subscapularis management techniques were repair to (1) tendon (tendon-tendon), (2) prosthetic stem, (3) lesser tuberosity (bone tunnels) or (4) a subscapularis-preserving approach (intact). The repair technique was recorded for included studies, and clinical and functional subjective scores were extracted from text, tables and figures. Forest plots were created to allow for qualitative comparison of the outcomes of interest between subscapularis repair techniques. FINDINGS: Seven comprehensive studies were identified, which included 367 patients. The mean age of patient at the time of surgery was 71.1 ± 2.8 years (range = 47-87 years). Overall, 259 patients underwent tendon-tendon repair, 48 patients underwent repair to prosthetic stem, 40 patients underwent repair with bone tunnels and 20 patients' subscapularis remained intact. Significant improvement was seen in most studies for Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (range, Δ 42.6-Δ 46.0 out of 3), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (range, Δ44.2-Δ43.6 out of 3) and Visual Analogue Scale pain scores (range Δ 4.2-Δ 6 out of 5). Active forward elevation (range Δ 40.4°-Δ 57.3° out of 4) and active external rotation (range Δ 2.9°-Δ 16.0° out of 4) significantly improved, but forward elevation varied by nearly 17° (Δ16.94°), while external rotation varied by 13° (Δ13.16°) among repair techniques. Complications were reported in only one study, which used a tendon-tendon technique. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study summarizes the current evidence regarding subscapularis repair techniques after rTSA including functional and subjective clinical outcome scores. Several different subscapularis repair techniques during rTSA appear to lend to sufficient improvement in clinical and subjective outcomes. This information can help guide future studies in this area and highlights the need for high quality studies comparing different subscapularis repair techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

"Off-label" Usage of an Oxidized Zirconium Femoral Head in Revision of a Total Hip Arthroplasty with Mechanically Assisted Crevice Corrosion and a Legacy Taper.

We present a case of a 72-year-old male with a history of a late 1980s metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty who presented with unilateral leg vascular compromise, joint pain, and stiffness and subsequently underwent revision for adverse local tissue reaction secondary to mechanically assisted crevice corrosion. His stable and extensively porous coated femoral implant had a legacy taper with no currently manufactured option for a non-Co-alloy femoral head. After shared decision-making with the patient, we opted to use an oxidized zirconium femoral head from another manufacturer with a similar taper during his revision surgery and documented that his vascular compromise resolved and his serum Co was undetectable 3 years after the revision.