The value of preoperative diagnostic testing and geriatric assessment in frail institutionalized elderly with a hip fracture; a secondary analysis of the FRAIL-HIP study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of (preoperative and geriatric) diagnostic testing, abnormal diagnostic tests and their subsequent interventions, and clinical relevance in frail older adults with a hip fracture. METHODS: Data on clinical consultations, radiological, laboratory, and microbiological diagnostics were extracted from the medical files of all patients included in the FRAIL-HIP study (inclusion criteria: hip fracture, > 70 years, living in a nursing home with malnourishment/cachexia and/or impaired mobility and/or severe co-morbidity). Data were evaluated until hospital discharge in nonoperatively treated patients and until surgery in operatively treated patients. RESULTS: A total of 172 patients (88 nonoperative and 84 operative) were included, of whom 156 (91%) underwent laboratory diagnostics, 126 (73%) chest X-rays, and 23 (13%) CT-scans. In 153/156 (98%) patients at least one abnormal result was found in laboratory diagnostics. In 82/153 (50%) patients this did not result in any additional diagnostics or (pharmacological) intervention. Abnormal test results were mentioned as one of the deciding arguments for operative delay (> 24 h) for 10/84 (12%) patients and as a factor in the decision between nonoperative and operative treatment in 7/172 (4%) patients. CONCLUSION: A large number and variety of diagnostics were performed in this patient population. Abnormal test results in laboratory diagnostics were found for almost all patients and, in majority, appear to have no direct clinical consequences. To prevent unnecessary diagnostics, prospective research is required to evaluate the clinical consequences and added value of the separate elements of preoperative diagnostic testing and geriatric assessment in frail hip fracture patients.

The Effectiveness of Adductor Canal Block Compared to Femoral Nerve Block on Readiness for Discharge in Patients Undergoing Outpatient Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Multi-Center Randomized Clinical Trial.

This study evaluated the effect of adductor canal block (ACB) versus femoral nerve block (FNB) on readiness for discharge in patients undergoing outpatient anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We hypothesized that ACB would provide sufficient pain relief while maintaining motor strength and safety, thus allowing for earlier discharge. This was a randomized, multi-center, superiority trial. From March 2014 to July 2017, patients undergoing ACL reconstruction were enrolled. The primary outcome was the difference in readiness for discharge, defined as Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System score ≥ 9. Twenty-six patients were allocated to FNB and twenty-seven to ACB. No difference in readiness for discharge was found (FNB median 1.8 (95% CI 1.0 to 3.5) vs. ACB 2.9 (1.5 to 4.7) hours, p = 0.3). Motor blocks and (near) falls were more frequently reported in patients with FNB vs. ACB (20 (76.9%) vs. 1 (3.7%), p < 0.001, and 7 (29.2%) vs. 1 (4.0%), p = 0.023. However, less opioids were consumed in the post-anesthesia care unit for FNB (median 3 [0, 21] vs. 15 [12, 42.5] oral morphine milligram equivalents, p = 0.004) for ACB. Between patients with FNB or ACB, no difference concerning readiness for discharge was found. Despite a slight reduction in opioid consumption immediately after surgery, FNB demonstrates a less favorable safety profile compared to ACB, with more motor blocks and (near) falls.

Evaluation of Quality of Life After Nonoperative or Operative Management of Proximal Femoral Fractures in Frail Institutionalized Patients: The FRAIL-HIP Study.

Importance: Decision-making on management of proximal femoral fractures in frail patients with limited life expectancy is challenging, but surgical overtreatment needs to be prevented. Current literature provides limited insight into the true outcomes of nonoperative management and operative management in this patient population. Objective: To investigate the outcomes of nonoperative management vs operative management of proximal femoral fractures in institutionalized frail older patients with limited life expectancy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study was conducted between September 1, 2018, and April 25, 2020, with a 6-month follow-up period at 25 hospitals across the Netherlands. Eligible patients were aged 70 years or older, frail, and institutionalized and sustained a femoral neck or pertrochanteric fracture. The term frail implied at least 1 of the following characteristics was present: malnutrition (body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared] <18.5) or cachexia, severe comorbidities (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class of IV or V), or severe mobility issues (Functional Ambulation Category ≤2). Exposures: Shared decision-making (SDM) followed by nonoperative or operative fracture management. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D) utility score by proxies and caregivers. Secondary outcome measures were QUALIDEM (a dementia-specific quality-of-life instrument for persons with dementia in residential settings) scores, pain level (assessed by the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors With Limited Ability to Communicate), adverse events (Clavien-Dindo classification), mortality, treatment satisfaction (numeric rating scale), and quality of dying (Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire). Results: Of the 172 enrolled patients with proximal femoral fractures (median [25th and 75th percentile] age, 88 [85-92] years; 135 women [78%]), 88 opted for nonoperative management and 84 opted for operative management. The EQ-5D utility scores by proxies and caregivers in the nonoperative management group remained within the set 0.15 noninferiority limit of the operative management group (week 1: 0.17 [95% CI, 0.13-0.29] vs 0.26 [95% CI, 0.11-0.23]; week 2: 0.19 [95% CI, 0.10-0.27] vs 0.28 [95% CI, 0.22-0.35]; and week 4: 0.24 [95% CI, 0.15-0.33] vs 0.34 [95% CI, 0.28-0.41]). Adverse events were less frequent in the nonoperative management group vs the operative management group (67 vs 167). The 30-day mortality rate was 83% (n = 73) in the nonoperative management group and 25% (n = 21) in the operative management group, with 26 proxies and caregivers (51%) in the nonoperative management group rating the quality of dying as good-almost perfect. Treatment satisfaction was high in both groups, with a median numeric rating scale score of 8. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study indicated that nonoperative management of proximal femoral fractures (selected through an SDM process) was a viable option for frail institutionalized patients with limited life expectancy, suggesting that surgery should not be a foregone conclusion for this patient population.

Patella related problems as common reason for revision of NexGen PS® total knee arthroplasty without patella resurfacing: An analysis of 5911 primary total knee arthroplasties registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.

BACKGROUND: Patella resurfacing remains controversial in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).The aim of this study was to investigate if there was a difference in revision rate and reason for revision within 8 years after single brand primary cemented TKA with or without patella resurfacing, using data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. METHODS: All primary TKA surgeries with a posterior stabilized cemented primary NexGen®, between 2010 and 2013 with diagnosis osteoarthritis were analyzed (n = 5911). Multivariate cox regression analyses were performed to analyze differences in revision rate between TKA with or without patella component, and was adjusted for age and previous surgery. RESULTS: Of 5911 TKA surgeries, 4795 were performed without patella resurfacing (81.1%) and 1116 with patella resurfacing (18.9%). There was a significant difference in patellar problems as reason for revision between patients after primary TKA with patella resurfacing (9.3%) and without patella resurfacing (29.9%) (p = 0.01). This was mostly caused by patellar pain (28.0%). There was no significant difference in cumulative revision rate within between TKA with patella resurfacing and without patella resurfacing. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, 30% of patients who need revision surgery after TKA using NexGen® PS without patella resurfacing the reason for revision is patella related problems, compared to 9% after TKA NexGen® PS with patella resurfacing. There was no difference in cumulative incidence of revision after primary surgery of all TKA's using NexGen® PS with or without patella. To reduce the probability of reoperation for patella related problems, our data suggest the patella should be resurface during primary TKA.

The value of nonoperative versus operative treatment of frail institutionalized elderly patients with a proximal femoral fracture in the shade of life (FRAIL-HIP); protocol for a multicenter observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral fractures are strongly associated with morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. Mortality is highest among frail institutionalized elderly with both physical and cognitive comorbidities who consequently have a limited life expectancy. Evidence based guidelines on whether or not to operate on these patients in the case of a proximal femoral fracture are lacking. Practice variation occurs, and it remains unknown if nonoperative treatment would result in at least the same quality of life as operative treatment. This study aims to determine the effect of nonoperative management versus operative management of proximal femoral fractures in a selected group of frail institutionalized elderly on the quality of life, level of pain, rate of complications, time to death, satisfaction of the patient (or proxy) and the caregiver with the management strategy, and health care consumption. METHODS: This is a multicenter, observational cohort study. Frail institutionalized elderly (70 years or older with a body mass index < 18.5, a Functional Ambulation Category of 2 or lower pre-trauma, or an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 4 or 5), who sustained a proximal femoral fracture are eligible to participate. Patients with a pathological or periprosthetic fractures and known metastatic oncological disease will be excluded. Treatment decision will be reached following a structured shared decision process. The primary outcome is quality of life (Euro-QoL; EQ-5D-5 L). Secondary outcome measures are quality of life measured with the QUALIDEM, pain level (PACSLAC), pain medication use, treatment satisfaction of patient (or proxy) and caregivers, quality of dying (QODD), time to death, and direct medical costs. A cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis will be done, using the EQ-5D utility score and QUALIDEM score, respectively. Non-inferiority of nonoperative treatment is assumed with a limit of 0.15 on the EQ-5D score. Data will be acquired at 7, 14, and 30 days and at 3 and 6 months after trauma. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide insight into the true value of nonoperative treatment of proximal femoral fractures in frail elderly with a limited life expectancy. The results may be used for updating (inter)national treatment guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR7245; date 10-06-2018).

Prosthesis retention after an infected hip prosthesis: hip fractures versus primary total hip prosthesis, data from 1998 - 2015.

Background: A prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication and specifically a burden for patients after hip fracture surgery, as they are mostly frail elderly patients with multiple comorbidities. Since treatment protocols are lacking there is a need to evaluate current practice. Aim: To evaluate the difference in prosthesis retention after an infected primary total hip replacement (THR) compared to PJI after hip prosthesis surgery performed for a hip fracture. Methods: We retrospectively collected data of patients who developed PJI after primary THR or after hip fracture surgery (THR or hemiarthroplasty) in the Westfriesgasthuis Hospital between 1998 and 2015. Main outcome variables were DAIR treatment and prosthesis retention. Findings: A PJI developed in 48 patients after primary THR and in 23 patients after hip fracture surgery. DAIR was performed in all patients after primary THR and in 87.0% of patients after hip fracture surgery (p<0.05). In 11.4% of patients after primary THR, revision surgery was performed within 1 year after PJI compared to 34.8% after hip fracture surgery (p<0.05). Only 2.1% of patients deceased within 1 year after infection of primary THR compared to 34.8% after hip fracture surgery (p<0.05). Conclusion: Our results showed that prosthesis retention in patients with a PJI after hip fracture surgery is 23% lower than in patients with a PJI after primary THR. This is probably due to the fact that patients who experience a hip fracture are mostly frail elderly with multiple comorbidities and therefore less able to conquer a PJI.

In patients undergoing fast track total knee arthroplasty, addition of buprenorphine to a femoral nerve block has no clinical advantage: A prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Several adjuvants have been proposed to prolong the effect of peripheral nerve blocks, one of which is buprenorphine. In this randomized double blinded placebo controlled trial we studied whether the addition of buprenorphine to a femoral nerve block prolongs analgesia in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in a fast track surgery protocol. METHODS: The treatment group (B) was given an ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block with ropivacaine 0.2% and 0.3mg buprenorphine. We choose to use 2 control groups. Group R was given a femoral nerve block with ropivacaine 0.2% only. Group S also received 0.3 mg buprenorphine subcutaneously. Only patients with a successful block were enrolled in the study. RESULTS: We found no difference in our primary outcome parameter of time to first rescue analgesic. We found lower opioid use and better sleep quality the first postoperative night in patients receiving buprenorphine perineurally or subcutaneously. Buprenorphine did not lead to any significant change in pain or mobilization. We found a high overall incidence of nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, in the setting of a fast track surgery protocol, the addition of buprenorphine to a femoral nerve block did not prolong analgesia.

The influence of endplate-to-endplate cement augmentation on vertebral strength and stiffness in vertebroplasty.

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled in vitro trial. OBJECTIVE: To study vertebral strength in relation to cement augmentation technique after vertebroplasty and to assess the influence of the biomechanical compression model on postoperative results. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures, the role of vertebroplasty has been well established. Biomechanical compression models thus far used, compressing vertebrae by only 25% of their initial height, did not show a correlation between cement augmentation volumes and postoperative compression strength. In these studies, even very small volumes of cement seem effective. However, these models may not realistically simulate clinically relevant osteoporotic wedge fractures. We hypothesize that, in clinically relevant osteoporotic wedge fractures, postoperative vertebral body strength is strongly dependent on endplate-to-endplate cement augmentation. METHODS: Twenty-five intact osteoporotic cadaver vertebrae were obtained (10 lumbar, 15 thoracic). In 21 vertebrae, anterior wedge fractures (AO type A1.2) were created by controlled external force, with preset height reduction by 35%. After height reconstruction, 9 vertebrae were augmented endplate-to-endplate and 12 vertebrae were partially augmented with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). Another 4 vertebrae were compressed by only 25%. Posttreatment strength and stiffness of the vertebrae were determined by a compression test identical to the pretreatment compression protocol. RESULTS: In the 35% compression group, posttreatment strength was significantly decreased in vertebrae that were partially augmented with cement compared with the endplate-to-endplate augmented group (767 +/- 257 N vs. 1141 +/- 325 N, P < 0.01). Postoperative strength amounted 106% +/- 27% of preoperative strength values in the endplate-to-endplate augmented vertebrae, compared with 65% +/- 18% in the partially augmented vertebrae (P < 0.001). In the 25% compression group, results in height restored and augmented vertebrae were similar to the nontreated vertebrae. CONCLUSIONS: Endplate-to-endplate PMMA augmentation restores the biomechanical properties of vertebrae in clinically relevant anterior wedge fractures. Our preliminary data suggest that biomechanical models with only 25% compressive deformation unlikely form a good model to assess the mechanical effects of cement augmentation in osteoporotic fractures.