Association between immigration status and total knee arthroplasty outcomes in Ontario, Canada: a population-based matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Immigrants and refugees face unique challenges navigating the health care system to manage severe arthritis, because of unfamiliarity, lack of awareness of surgical options, or access. The purpose of this study was to assess total knee arthroplasty (TKA) uptake, surgical outcomes, and hospital utilization among immigrants and refugees compared with Canadian-born patients. METHODS: We included all adults undergoing primary TKA from January 2011 to December 2020 in Ontario. Cohorts were defined as Canadian-born or immigrants and refugees. We assessed change in yearly TKA utilization for trend. We compared differences in 1-year revision, infection rates, 30-day venous thromboembolism (VTE), presentation to emergency department, and hospital readmission between matched Canadian-born and immigrant and refugee groups. RESULTS: We included 158 031 TKA procedures. A total of 11 973 (7.6%) patients were in the immigrant and refugee group, and 146 058 (92.4%) patients were in the Canadian-born group. The proportion of TKAs in Ontario performed among immigrants and refugees nearly doubled over the 10-year study period (p < 0.001). After matching, immigrants were at relatively lower risk of 1-year revision (0.9% v. 1.6%, p < 0.001), infection (p < 0.001), death (p = 0.004), and surgical complications (p < 0.001). No differences were observed in rates of 30-day VTE or length of hospital stay. Immigrants were more likely to be discharged to rehabilitation (p < 0.001) and less likely to present to the emergency department (p < 0.001) than Canadian-born patients. CONCLUSION: Compared with Canadian-born patients, immigrants and refugees have favourable surgical outcomes and similar rates of resource utilization after TKA. We observed an underutilization of these procedures in Ontario relative to their proportion of the population. This may reflect differences in perceptions of chronic pain or barriers accessing arthroplasty.

Virtual versus in-person physiotherapy following total knee arthroplasty: a comparative analysis.

PURPOSE: At our centre, we developed and implemented a video-based post-operative physiotherapy program for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Our aims were to analyse and compare the outcomes of this program to in-person physiotherapy. METHODS: We reviewed the outcomes of 112 patients and captured range-of-motion (ROM) measurements and pain scores (P4 questionnaire). We compared the outcomes to a cohort of 175 patients undergoing in-person therapy. Comparative analysis was performed using a two-tailed Student's t-test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, sex, or initial post-operative knee ROM. On discharge from virtual physiotherapy, mean flexion was 122.6° (SD 7.6). There was no significant difference in improvement in knee flexion between the virtual and in-person groups (mean 30.6° vs 34.0°, p = 0.07). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 120° of flexion (85.0% virtual vs 91.3% in-person, p = 0.11) or those achieving an extension deficit of ≤ 5° (96.0% vs 98.3%, p = 0.25). There was no difference in the number of PT visits to discharge (10.5 vs 11.1, p = 0.14) or final pain scores (12.4 vs 11.9, p = 0.61). CONCLUSION: Improvements in knee ROM measures are comparable between virtual and in-person physiotherapy with both groups achieving a good functional range. These findings have implications for the virtual delivery of healthcare, especially among remote populations and patients with mobility limitations.

Do Adhesive Drapes Have an Effect on Infection Rates in Orthopaedic Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adhesive surgical drapes are purported to reduce the rates of surgical site infection. Despite that, international surgical guidelines generally recommend against the use of such drapes; however, this is primarily based on nonorthopaedic evidence. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does the use of adhesive drapes decrease the risk of wound contamination? (2) Does intraoperative drape peeling (intentional or inadvertent) increase the risk of wound contamination? (3) Does the use of adhesive drapes decrease the risk of surgical site infection? METHODS: A systematic review of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook methods for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published since 2000 and comparing adhesive drapes with controls. All databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2021. A pooled meta-analysis was performed, where possible. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess risk of bias among the included studies. From among 417 search results, five eligible RCTs were identified and included, all of which were published between 2018 and 2020. There were a total of 2266 patients, with 1129 (49.8%) in the adhesive drape groups, and 1137 (50.2%) in the control groups. The studies included hip and knee surgery trials (n = 3 trials; 1020 patients in intervention groups and 1032 patients in control groups) as well as trials on shoulder arthroscopy (n = 1 trial; 65 patients in the intervention group and 61 patients in the control group) and lumbar spine surgery (n = 1 trial; 44 patients in each group). The data for all three outcomes (wound contamination, impact of intraoperative peeling, and surgical site infection) revealed low heterogeneity based on random-effects models (I2 = 14%, 0%, and 0%, respectively). RESULTS: Based on data from pooled wound swab culture results from four studies, a reduction in wound contamination was associated with the use of adhesive drapes (odds ratio 0.49 [95% CI 0.34 to 0.72]; p < 0.001). The available evidence was inconclusive to determine whether intraoperative drape peeling (intentional or inadvertent) influenced the risk of wound contamination. Three studies did not report on this outcome, one study found an increased infection rate with drape peel back, and another study found a reduced treatment effect of adhesive drapes when peel back occurred in a subgroup analysis. The two studies that analyzed surgical site infections reported no infections in either arm; therefore, we could not answer the question of whether adhesive drapes affect risk of surgical site infection. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review suggest that adhesive drapes, including those with antimicrobial properties, decrease the risk of wound contamination during orthopaedic procedures. In circumstances where drape adhesion is compromised and peel back occurs at the wound edge, there is an increased risk of wound contamination with the use of adhesive drapes. The best currently available evidence is indeterminate as to the effect of adhesive drapes on the risk of surgical site infections; however, if used, care should be taken to avoid or minimize drape peel back. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

The Use of Rifampin in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Rifampin is an antibiotic with the ability to penetrate bacterial biofilms, and thus has been considered as a potentially important adjunct in the prevention and treatment of PJI. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize the use of rifampin in TJA, particularly in the context of PJI. METHODS: A literature search of all relevant electronic databases was performed. All comparative studies assessing the use of rifampin in the context of TJA were included. Descriptive data are reported, and a meta-analysis was performed using all studies which compared the addition of rifampin to standard care in treating PJI. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of 22 studies comparing the addition of rifampin to standard care for treating PJI found a significant reduction in failure rates (26.0% vs 35.9%; odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.86). The protective effect of rifampin was maintained in studies which included exchange arthroplasty as a treatment strategy, but not in studies only using an implant retention strategy. Among studies reporting adverse events of rifampin, there was a 20.5% adverse event rate. CONCLUSION: Overall, rifampin appears to confer a protective effect against treatment failure following PJI. This treatment effect is particularly pronounced in the context of exchange arthroplasty. Further high-level evidence is needed to clarify the exact indications and doses of rifampin which can most effectively act as an adjunct in the treatment of PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Level I-III Studies.

How Satisfied Are Patients and Surgeons with Telemedicine in Orthopaedic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in a rapid pivot toward telemedicine owing to closure of in-person elective clinics and sustained efforts at physical distancing worldwide. Throughout this period, there has been revived enthusiasm for delivering and receiving orthopaedic care remotely. Unfortunately, rapidly published editorials and commentaries during the pandemic have not adequately conveyed findings of published randomized trials on this topic. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials, we asked: (1) What are the levels of patient and surgeon satisfaction with the use of telemedicine as a tool for orthopaedic care delivery? (2) Are there differences in patient-reported outcomes between telemedicine visits and in-person visits? (3) What is the difference in time commitment between telemedicine and in-person visits? METHODS: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review with the primary objective to determine patient and surgeon satisfaction with telemedicine, and secondary objectives to determine differences in patient-reported outcomes and time commitment. We used combinations of search keywords and medical subject headings around the terms "telemedicine", "telehealth", and "virtual care" combined with "orthopaedic", "orthopaedic surgery" and "randomized." We searched three medical databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) in duplicate and performed manual searches to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the outcomes of telemedicine and in-person orthopaedic assessments. Trials that studied an intervention that was considered to be telemedicine (that is, any form of remote or virtual care including, but not limited to, video, telephone, or internet-based care), had a control group that comprised in-person assessments performed by orthopaedic surgeons, and were reports of Level I original evidence were included in this study. Studies evaluating physiotherapy or rehabilitation interventions were excluded. Data was extracted by two reviewers and quantitative and qualitive summaries of results were generated. Methodological quality of included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, which uniformly rated the trials at high risk of bias within the blinding categories (blinding of providers, patients, and outcome assessors). We screened 133 published articles; 12 articles (representing eight randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. There were 1008 patients randomized (511 to telemedicine groups and 497 to control groups). Subspecialties represented were hip and knee arthroplasty (two trials), upper extremity (two trials), pediatric trauma (one trial), adult trauma (one trial), and general orthopaedics (two trials). RESULTS: There was no difference in the odds of satisfaction between patients receiving telemedicine care and those receiving in-person care (pooled odds ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.40 to 1.99]; p = 0.79). There were also no differences in surgeon satisfaction (pooled OR 0.38 [95% CI 0.07 to 2.19]; p = 0.28) or among multiple patient-reported outcome measures that evaluated pain and function. Patients reported time savings, both when travel time was excluded (17 minutes shorter [95% CI 2 to 32]; p = 0.03) and when it was included (180 minutes shorter [95% CI 78 to 281]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Evidence from heterogeneous randomized studies demonstrates that the use of telemedicine for orthopaedic assessments does not result in identifiable differences in patient or surgeon satisfaction compared with in-person assessments. Importantly, the source studies in this review did not adequately capture or report safety endpoints, such as complications or missed diagnoses. Future studies must be adequately powered to detect these differences to ensure patient safety is not compromised with the use of telemedicine. Although telemedicine may lead to a similar patient experience, surgeons should maintain a low threshold for follow-up with in-person assessments whenever possible in the absence of further safety data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Early Discharge After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty-An Observational Cohort Study Evaluating Safety in 330,000 Patients.

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable interest in recent years for early discharge after arthroplasty. We endeavored to evaluate the safety of same-day discharge given the rapid uptake of this practice approach. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry database. We included patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between 2015 and 2018. We categorized length of stay (LOS) as same-day discharge (LOS = 0 days), accelerated discharge (LOS = 1 day), and routine discharge (LOS = 2-3 days). For each LOS cohort, we determined the incidence of major complications within 30 days (surgical site infection [SSI], reoperation, readmission, deep vein thrombosis [DVT], and PE) and evaluated risk using multivariate logistic regression analysis if incidence was >1%. Patients undergoing THA and TKA were evaluated independently. RESULTS: The final study cohort consisted of 333,212 patients, including 124,150 who underwent THA (37%) and 209,062 who had TKA (63%). In the THA same-day discharge cohort, the incidence of superficial SSI (0.2%), deep/organ space SSI (0.3%), DVT (0.2%), and PE (0.2%) was low. The risk of reoperation was comparable to routine discharge (odds ratio [OR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.09; P = .17) and readmission rate was significantly lower (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48-0.76; P < .001). The risk of reoperation and readmission was also lower in the accelerated discharge cohort compared to routine discharge. In the TKA same-day discharge cohort, the risk of superficial SSI (0.3%), deep/organ space SSI (0.3%), reoperation (0.8%), DVT (0.4%), and PE (0.5%) was low. The risk of readmission after same-day discharge was comparable to routine discharge (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.71-1.01; P = .07). In the accelerated discharge cohort, there was a small reduction in readmission risk (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.93; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This large, observational, real-world study suggests that same-day and accelerated discharge management is safe clinical practice for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty, yielding a similar risk of major acute 30-day complications. Further clinical trials evaluating long-term major outcomes, including patient-reported outcomes and experiences, would offer further and definitive insight into this practice approach.

Clinical Outcomes and Midterm Survivorship of an Uncemented Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty System.

BACKGROUND: The rise in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has led to a concomitant increase in revision THAs. Tracking implant performance therefore remains a significant element of scientific inquiry to garner and maintain public trust in this procedure. There are few available reports of outcomes of a single manufacturer's total hip system outside registry data. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively generated database to evaluate outcomes of a single manufacturer's femoral stem and acetabular shell for THA. We report the functional outcomes, revision data, and survivorship for this total hip system. RESULTS: A total of 1942 primary THAs were implanted into 1672 patients. There were of 57 revisions. There were no cases of acetabular failure at 10-year follow-up. All functional outcome scores demonstrated significant improvements following THA. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for all-cause revisions demonstrated 2-year implant survival of 97.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96.9-98.3), 5-year implant survival of 97.3% (95% CI, 96.5-98.1), and 10-year implant survival of 97.0% (95% CI, 96.0-98.0). When infection was excluded, implant survivorship improved to 99.2% (95% CI, 98.8-99.6) at 2 years, 98.9% (95% CI, 98.5-99.4) at 5 years, and 98.7% (95% CI, 98.1-99.4) at 10 years. CONCLUSION: This THA implant system comprising an uncemented press-fit acetabulum used alongside a triple-tapered femoral stem is an excellent option for THA. Implant survivorship at 2, 5, and 10 years is among the best reported for any total hip system in the world.

Indications, Survivorship, and Clinical Outcomes of a Rotating Hinge Total Knee and Distal Femoral Arthroplasty System.

BACKGROUND: Rotating hinge knee prostheses (with or without distal femoral replacement) are indicated in cases of unreconstructible bony or soft tissue compromise. Despite their versatility, these implants have demonstrated high rates of mechanical failure. We aimed to review clinical outcomes of a novel hinged knee arthroplasty system. METHODS: We reviewed all cases in a prospective database of hinged total knee arthroplasty (with and without distal femoral arthroplasty) involving a single manufacturer's implant system at a large tertiary-level academic health sciences center. We collected reasons for surgery, implant survivorship, reasons for revision, and clinical outcomes (Short Form 12, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Knee Society Scores). RESULTS: Seventy-six cases of hinged knee implants using the knee system under investigation were performed (39 hinged total knee and 37 distal femoral replacements) between 2011 and 2018, inclusive. Indications for surgery varied, with second-stage reimplantation most common for rotating hinge and fracture most common for distal femoral arthroplasty. There were 6 revisions in the rotating hinge group (none for aseptic loosening) and 5 in the distal femoral arthroplasty group (1 for aseptic loosening). Average follow-up was 2.89 ± 2.09 years. Postoperative Short Form 12 (Physical Component), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Knee Society Scores were 30.12 ± 10.17, 55.90 ± 21.51, and 115.62 ± 45.20, respectively. CONCLUSION: This novel hinged knee system is a highly durable option for complex and revision knee arthroplasty. Early failures tend to be secondary to infection. We observed only a single case of aseptic loosening. Although these early results are encouraging, ongoing follow-up is required to determine long-term prognosis in patients receiving this implant.

Network Meta-analysis: Users' Guide for Surgeons: Part I - Credibility.

Conventional meta-analyses quantify the relative effectiveness of two interventions based on direct (that is, head-to-head) evidence typically derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). For many medical conditions, however, multiple treatment options exist and not all have been compared directly. This issue limits the utility of traditional synthetic techniques such as meta-analyses, since these approaches can only pool and compare evidence across interventions that have been compared directly by source studies. Network meta-analyses (NMA) use direct and indirect comparisons to quantify the relative effectiveness of three or more treatment options. Interpreting the methodologic quality and results of NMAs may be challenging, as they use complex methods that may be unfamiliar to surgeons; yet for these surgeons to use these studies in their practices, they need to be able to determine whether they can trust the results of NMAs. The first judgment of trust requires an assessment of the credibility of the NMA methodology; the second judgment of trust requires a determination of certainty in effect sizes and directions. In this Users' Guide for Surgeons, Part I, we show the application of evaluation criteria for determining the credibility of a NMA through an example pertinent to clinical orthopaedics. In the subsequent article (Part II), we help readers evaluate the level of certainty NMAs can provide in terms of treatment effect sizes and directions.

Network Meta-analysis: Users' Guide for Surgeons: Part II - Certainty.

In the previous article (Network Meta-analysis: Users' Guide for Surgeons-Part I, Credibility), we presented an approach to evaluating the credibility or methodologic rigor of network meta-analyses (NMA), an innovative approach to simultaneously addressing the relative effectiveness of three or more treatment options for a given medical condition or disease state. In the second part of the Users' Guide for Surgeons, we discuss and demonstrate the application of criteria for determining the certainty in effect sizes and directions associated with a given treatment option through an example pertinent to clinical orthopaedics.

Are Volar Locking Plates Superior to Percutaneous K-wires for Distal Radius Fractures? A Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures are common, costly, and increasing in incidence. Percutaneous K-wire fixation and volar locking plates are two of the most commonly used surgical treatments for unstable dorsally displaced distal radius fractures. However, there is uncertainty regarding which of these treatments is superior. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine whether patients treated with volar locking plates (1) achieved better function (2) attained better wrist motion, (3) had better radiographic outcomes, and (4) had fewer complications develop than did patients treated with K-wires for dorsally displaced distal radius fractures. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE (inception to 2014, October Week 2), EMBASE (inception to 2014, Week 42), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify relevant randomized controlled trials; we supplemented these searches with manual searches. We included studies of extraarticular and intraarticular distal radius fractures. Adjunctive external fixation was acceptable as long as the intent was to use only K-wires where possible and external fixation was used in less than 25% of the procedures. We considered a difference in the DASH scores of 10 as the minimal clinically important difference. We performed quality assessment with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and evaluated the strength of recommendations using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Seven randomized trials with a total of 875 participants were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Patients treated with volar locking plates had slightly better function than did patients treated with K-wires as measured by their DASH scores at 3 months (mean difference [MD], 7.5; 95% CI, 4.4-10.6; p < 0.001) and 12 months (MD, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.2-6.3; p = 0.004). Neither of these differences exceeded the a priori-determined threshold for clinical importance (10 points). There was a small early advantage in flexion and supination in the volar locking plate group (3.7° [95% CI, 0.3°-7.1°; p = 0.04] and 4.1° [95% CI, 0.6°-7.6°; p = 0.02] greater, respectively) at 3 months, but not at later followups (6 or 12 months). There were no differences in radiographic outcomes (volar tilt, radial inclination, and radial height) between the two interventions. Superficial wound infection was more common in patients treated with K-wires (8.2% versus 3.2%; RR = 2.6; p = 0.001), but otherwise no difference in complication rates was found. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the small number of studies and the limitations inherent in a meta-analysis, we found that volar locking plates show better DASH scores at 3- and 12-month followups compared with K-wires for displaced distal radius fractures in adults; however, these differences were small and unlikely to be clinically important. Further research is required to better delineate if there are specific radiographic, injury, or patient characteristics that may benefit from volar locking plates in the short term and whether there are any differences in long-term outcomes and complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Which Surgical Treatment for Open Tibial Shaft Fractures Results in the Fewest Reoperations? A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Open tibial shaft fractures are one of the most devastating orthopaedic injuries. Surgical treatment options include reamed or unreamed nailing, plating, Ender nails, Ilizarov fixation, and external fixation. Using a network meta-analysis allows comparison and facilitates pooling of a diverse population of randomized trials across these approaches in ways that a traditional meta-analysis does not. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Our aim was to perform a network meta-analysis using evidence from randomized trials on the relative effect of alternative approaches on the risk of unplanned reoperation after open fractures of the tibial diaphysis. Our secondary study endpoints included malunion, deep infection, and superficial infection. METHODS: A network meta-analysis allows for simultaneous consideration of the relative effectiveness of multiple treatment alternatives. To do this on the subject of surgical treatments for open tibial fractures, we began with systematic searches of databases (including EMBASE and MEDLINE) and performed hand searches of orthopaedic journals, bibliographies, abstracts from orthopaedic conferences, and orthopaedic textbooks, for all relevant material published between 1980 and 2013. Two authors independently screened abstracts and manuscripts and extracted the data, three evaluated the risk of bias in individual studies, and two applied Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria to bodies of evidence. We included all randomized and quasirandomized trials comparing two (or more) surgical treatment options for open tibial shaft fractures in predominantly (ie, > 80%) adult patients. We calculated pooled estimates for all direct comparisons and conducted a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect evidence for all 15 comparisons between six stabilization strategies. Fourteen trials published between 1989 and November 2011 met our inclusion criteria; the trials comprised a total of 1279 patients surgically treated for open tibial shaft fractures. RESULTS: Moderate confidence evidence showed that unreamed nailing may reduce the likelihood of reoperation compared with external fixation (network odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23-0.62; p < 0.05), although not necessarily compared with reamed nailing (direct OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.45-1.24; p = 0.25). Only low- or very low-quality evidence informed the primary outcome for other treatment comparisons, such as those involving internal plate fixation, Ilizarov external fixation, and Ender nailing. Method ranking based on reoperation data showed that unreamed nailing had the highest probability of being the best treatment, followed by reamed nailing, external fixation, and plate fixation. CIs around pooled estimates of malunion and infection risk were very wide, and therefore no conclusive results could be made based on these data. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that intramedullary nailing may be superior to other fixation strategies for open tibial shaft fractures. Use of unreamed nails over reamed nails also may be advantageous in the setting of open fractures, but this remains to be confirmed. Unfortunately, these conclusions are based on trials that have had high risk of bias and poor precision. Larger and higher-quality head-to-head randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these conclusions and better inform clinical decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Outcomes After Hip Fracture Surgery Compared With Elective Total Hip Replacement.

IMPORTANCE: Patients undergoing surgery for a hip fracture have a higher risk of mortality and major complications compared with patients undergoing an elective total hip replacement (THR) operation. The effect of older age and comorbidities associated with hip fracture on this increased perioperative risk is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine if there was a difference in hospital mortality among patients who underwent hip fracture surgery relative to an elective THR, after adjustment for age, sex, and preoperative comorbidities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the French National Hospital Discharge Database from January 2010 to December 2013, patients older than 45 years undergoing hip surgery at French hospitals were included. The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10), codes were used to determine patients' comorbidities and complications after surgery. A population matched for age, sex, and preoperative comorbidities of patients who underwent elective THR or hip fracture surgery was created using a multivariable logistic model and a greedy matching algorithm with a 1:1 ratio. EXPOSURE: Hip fracture. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Postoperative in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 690,995 eligible patients were included from 864 centers in France. Patients undergoing elective THR surgery (n = 371,191) were younger, more commonly men, and had less comorbidity compared with patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Following hip fracture surgery (n = 319,804), 10,931 patients (3.42%) died before hospital discharge and 669 patients (0.18%) died after elective THR. Multivariable analysis of the matched populations (n = 234,314) demonstrated a higher risk of mortality (1.82% for hip fracture surgery vs 0.31% for elective THR; absolute risk increase, 1.51% [95% CI, 1.46%-1.55%]; relative risk [RR], 5.88 [95% CI, 5.26-6.58]; P < .001) and of major postoperative complications (5.88% for hip fracture surgery vs 2.34% for elective THR; absolute risk increase, 3.54% [95% CI, 3.50%-3.59%]; RR, 2.50 [95% CI, 2.40-2.62]; P < .001) among patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a large cohort of French patients, hip fracture surgery compared with elective THR was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality after adjustment for age, sex, and measured comorbidities. Further studies are needed to define the causes for these differences.

Systematic review on the inclusion of patients with cognitive impairment in hip fracture trials: a missed opportunity?

BACKGROUND: More than 320 000 hip fractures occur annually in North America. An estimated 30% of this population have cognitive impairment. We sought to determine the extent to which patients with cognitive impairment or dementia have been included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing hip fracture management. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of 3 electronic journal databases of articles published between January 2000 and June 2010. Studies were screened in duplicate to collect English-language RCTs assessing operative interventions for femoral head, neck or intertrochanteric fractures. We systematically collected descriptive data and used the χ(2) test for comparison between groups as appropriate. RESULTS: We screened 1201 abstracts, 72 of which were eligible for inclusion in our review. Femoral neck and intertrochanteric fractures were equally represented. Thirty-three (46%) studies did not report the inclusion or exclusion of patients with cognitive impairment. Nineteen (26%) studies explicitly included cognitively impaired patients, whereas 20 (28%) excluded them. Only 2 trials (3%) reported outcomes specific to cognitively impaired patients. Fourteen trials (19.4%) reported the use of a validated cognitive assessment tool. None of the trials that reported inclusion of cognitively impaired patients were from North American centres. CONCLUSION: One in 3 patients with hip fractures have concomitant cognitive impairment, yet 8 of 10 hip fracture trials excluded or ignored this population. The ambiguity or exclusion of these patients misses an opportunity to study outcomes and identify factors associated with improved prognosis.

CONTEXTE: On dénombre plus de 320 000 fractures de la hanche chaque année en Amérique du Nord et on estime que 30 % de ces personnes ont une atteinte cognitive. Nous avons voulu déterminer dans quelle mesure les patients qui souffrent d'une atteinte cognitive ou de démence ont été inclus dans les essais randomisés et contrôlés (ERC) portant sur la prise en charge de la fracture de la hanche. MÉTHODES: Nous avons procédé à une interrogation systématique de 3 bases de données de journaux électroniques pour recenser les articles publiés entre janvier 2000 et juin 2010. Les études ont été passées en revue en parallèle pour dégager les ERC de langue anglaise ayant évalué des interventions chirurgicales pour fractures de la tête ou du col du fémur ou fractures intertrochantériennes. Nous avons recueilli les données descriptives de manière systématique et utilisé le test du χ2 pour comparer des groupes entre eux, selon le cas. RÉSULTATS: Nous avons passé en revue 1201 résumés, dont 72 répondaient à nos critères d'admissibilité. Les fractures du col du fémur et intertrochantériennes étaient représentées en proportions égales. Trente-trois études (46 %) ne faisaient aucune mention de l'inclusion ou de l'exclusion des patients souffrant d'atteinte cognitive. Dix-neuf (26 %) études incluaient expressément des patients souffrant d'atteinte cognitive, tandis que 20 (28 %) les excluaient. Seulement 2 essais (3 %) ont fait état de résultats spécifiques aux patients souffrant d'atteinte cognitive. Quatorze essais (19,4 %) ont déclaré utiliser un outil d'évaluation cognitive validé. Aucun des essais ayant mentionné l'inclusion de patients souffrant d'atteinte cognitive ne provenait de centres nord-américains. CONCLUSION: Un patient victime d'une fracture de la hanche sur 3 souffrait concomitamment d'une atteinte cognitive et pourtant, 8 essais sur 10 portant sur la fracture de la hanche ont exclus ou ignoré cette population. L'ambiguïté vis-à-vis de ces patients ou leur exclusion est une occasion manquée d'étudier les paramètres et de relever les facteurs associés à un pronostic plus favorable.

Clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of robotic assisted versus conventional total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare important clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) and conventional total hip arthroplasty (COTHA) in patients with hip osteoarthritis. We identified published RCTs comparing RATHA with COTHA in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently performed study screening, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Main outcomes were major complications, revision, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and radiological outcomes. We included 8 RCTs involving 1014 patients and 977 hips. There was no difference in major complication rate (Relative Risk (RR) 0.78; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.22 to 2.74), revision rate (RR 1.33; 95%CI 0.08 to 22.74), and PROMs (standardized mean difference 0.01; 95%CI - 0.27 to 0.30) between RATHA and COTHA. RATHA resulted in little to no effects on femoral stem alignment (mean difference (MD) - 0.57 degree; 95%CI - 1.16 to 0.03) but yielded overall lower leg length discrepancy (MD - 4.04 mm; 95%CI - 7.08 to - 1.0) compared to COTHA. Most combined estimates had low certainty of evidence mainly due to risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Based on the current evidence, there is no important difference in clinical and functional outcomes between RATHA and COTHA. The trivial higher radiological accuracy was also unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Regardless, more robust evidence is needed to improve the quality and strength of the current evidence.PROSPERO registration: the protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023453294). All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Association Between Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Mortality Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a dreaded and unpredictable complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). In addition to causing substantial morbidity, PJI may contribute to long-term mortality risk. Our objective was to determine the long-term mortality risk associated with PJI following THA. METHODS: This population-based, retrospective cohort study included adult patients (≥18 years old) in Ontario, Canada, who underwent their first primary elective THA for arthritis between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2021. The primary outcome was death within 10 years after the index THA. Mortality was compared between propensity-score-matched groups (PJI within 1 year after surgery versus no PJI within 1 year after surgery) with use of survival analyses. Patients who died within 1 year after surgery were excluded to avoid immortal time bias. RESULTS: A total of 175,432 patients (95,883 [54.7%] women) with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 67 ± 11.4 years underwent primary THA during the study period. Of these, 868 patients (0.49%) underwent surgery for a PJI of the replaced joint within 1 year after the index procedure. After matching, patients with a PJI within the first year had a significantly higher 10-year mortality rate than their counterparts (11.4% [94 of 827 patients] versus 2.2% [18 of 827 patients]; absolute risk difference, 9.19% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6.81% to 11.6%]; hazard ratio, 5.49 [95% CI, 3.32 to 9.09]). CONCLUSIONS: PJI within 1 year after surgery is associated with over a fivefold increased risk of mortality within 10 years. The findings of this study underscore the importance of prioritizing efforts related to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of PJIs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Risk of complications with prolonged operative time in morbidly obese patients undergoing elective total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a high body-mass index (BMI) are at increased risk for significant complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We explored whether operative time is a modifiable risk factor for infectious and thromboembolic complications. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study of the ACS-NSQIP registry, including all patients who underwent primary TKA (2015-2018), and were morbidly obese (BMI 40 kg/m2 or greater) was performed. We created four categories of operative time in minutes: less than 60, 60-90, 91-120, and greater than 120. The association of prolonged operative time with superficial/deep surgical site infection (SSI), DVT and PE within 30 days postoperatively was evaluated using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 34,190 patients were included (median age 63 [IQR 57-68], mean BMI of 44.6 kg/m2 [SD 4.4]). The majority of patients had an operative time between 60-90 mins (n = 13,640, 39.9%) or 91-120 mins (n = 9908, 29.0%). There was no significant association between longer operative time and superficial/deep/organ-space SSI or PE. DVT risk was significantly increased. Patients with time exceeding 120 mins had nearly 2.5 greater odds of DVT compared to less than 60 minutes (OR 2.47, 95% CI: 1.39-4.39, P = 0.002). Odds of DVT were 1.73 times greater in those with time of 91-120 mins (OR 1.73, 95%CI: 0.98-3.05, P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Early infection and thromboembolic complications with prolonged operative time in morbidly obese patients remain low. We did not identify a significant association with increased operative time and superficial/deep SSI, or PE. There was a significantly increased risk for deep vein thrombosis with prolonged operative time.

Efficacy of hydrofibre dressing following total joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, over 1,000,000 total joint arthroplasty (TJA) surgeries are performed annually and has been forecasted that this number will exceed 4,000,000 by the year 2030. Many different types of dressing exist for use in TJA surgery, and it is unclear if any of the newer, hydrofibre dressings are superior to traditional dressings at reducing rates of infections or improving wound healing. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of hydrofiber dressings on reducing complications. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the online databases MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hydrofibre dressings to a standard dressing were included. Summary measures are reported as odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcome was prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Secondary outcomes included blisters, dressing changes and wound irritation. RESULTS: 5 RCTs were included. Hydrofibre dressing had no observable effect on PJI or wound irritation (OR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14-1.98; p = 0.35). Hydrofibre dressings reduced the rate of blisters (OR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.90; p = 0.03) and number of dressing changes (MD -1.89; 95% CI, -2.68 to -1.11). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, evidence suggests hydrofibre dressings have no observable effect on PJI and wound irritation. Evidence for reduction in blisters and number of dressings is modest given wide CIs and biased trial methodologies. Use of hydrofibre dressings should be considered inconclusive for mitigating major complications in light of current best evidence.

Sex-specific differences in 30-day outcomes following primary total hip replacement in 86,684 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Although differential outcomes based on sex are widespread in medicine and surgery, evaluation of sex-specific differences in the field of orthopaedic surgery in general - and arthroplasty in particular - are lacking. We hypothesised that morbidly obese male and female patients would have differing risks of surgical complications following primary total hip replacement. METHODS: We reviewed data contained within the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2015 through 2018, inclusive. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was used to determine the adjusted odds ratios (OR) of relevant variables on primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 86,684 patients undergoing THR were identified, of whom 9972 patients (4095 male and 5877 female) were morbidly obese. Among morbidly obese patients, odds of surgical site infection were higher in females than males within 30 days of surgery (adjusted OR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.79; p = 0.007). This comprised the odds of both superficial infection (1.8% vs. 1.1%, adjusted OR 1.67; 95% CI, 1.16-2.40; p = 0.006) and deep infection (1.9% vs. 1.4%, adjusted OR 1.22; 95% CI, 0.88-1.68; p = 0.24). Unexpected return to the operating room (i.e., reoperation) within 30 days of the surgical procedure was also higher among females than males (4.2% vs. 3.1%, adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI, 1.10-1.71, p = 0.005). There were no differences between male and female patients in the non-obese cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with morbid obesity, the risk of surgical site infection and reoperation within the first 30 days is greater in women as compared to men. Future research must address whether this early increased risk among morbidly obese women persists in the longer term, and whether it results in compromised function or quality of life.

Variability in the approach to total hip arthroplasty in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures.

The aim of this study was to determine the degree of variability in implants, approaches, and associated complication rates in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) as an intervention for displaced femoral neck fractures. We searched 2 medical databases for RCTs involving THA for femoral neck fractures published between June 2000 and June 2010. All analyses were descriptive. Nine RCTs met our inclusion criteria. We identified variability in both the surgical approach and choice of prosthesis. Trials generally standardized to head sizes of 28 mm or greater and cemented prostheses. Surgical experience varied across studies. Dislocation rates varied from 0% to 22%. There is considerable variability in RCTs evaluating THA for femoral neck fractures. Standardization toward optimal outcomes for femoral neck fractures is needed.