Anticoagulation in Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Review of 1917 Cases.

Although several studies now support the use of aspirin for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the optimal chemoprophylactic agent in revision THA and TKA is not clear. The purpose of this study was to determine if the type of chemoprophylaxis has an effect on the VTE rate in patients undergoing revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The second aim was to compare differences in rates of wound drainage in primary and revision TJA stratified by the postoperative chemoprophylaxis used. The authors retrospectively reviewed 1917 consecutive patients undergoing primary and revision TJA. Individual records were reviewed for patient demographics, medical comorbidities, type of chemoprophylaxis, VTE risk factors, intraoperative data, and postoperative complications. Outcomes, including VTE rate and wound complications, were compared between types of anticoagulant therapy used postoperatively. Of the 1917 patients, there were 742 (38.7%) primary TKAs, 326 (17%) revision TKAs, 608 (31.7%) primary THAs, and 241 (12.6%) revision THAs. The most common prophylactic agent used was rivaroxaban (40.6%), followed by warfarin (28.5%) and aspirin (27.6%). Type of chemoprophylaxis was not associated with postoperative VTE or wound drainage (P>.05). Although revision surgery was an independent risk factor for wound drainage (odds ratio, 3.201; 95% confidence interval, 1.594-6.426; P=.001), it was not a risk factor for VTE (odds ratio, 1.847; 95% confidence interval, 0.423-8.053; P=.414). Revision arthroplasty alone was not associated with an increased rate of VTE. Aspirin is as effective as other chemoprophylactic agents without the increased risk of bleeding in low-risk patients. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(6):323-329.].

Nonoperative Treatment of Rotator Cuff Disease With Platelet-Rich Plasma: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials on the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. METHODS: Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 2 reviewers independently screened the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for prospective, randomized controlled trials comparing PRP with a control in the nonoperative treatment of chronic rotator cuff disease for inclusion. Clinical data were extracted and evaluated. The quality of evidence was assessed using The Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria, with 108 patients treated with PRP and 106 treated with a control. The mean age was 53.7 years, and 61.6% of patients were female patients. All of the studies found that the groups receiving PRP injections experienced improved clinical outcomes at final follow-up compared with baseline. Two studies found that PRP resulted in improved outcomes, mostly pain scores, compared with a control. One study compared PRP with formal exercise versus a saline solution injection with formal exercise therapy. It showed no difference in clinical outcomes between PRP and a saline solution injection when formal exercise therapy was used. Two other studies reported that PRP alone resulted in inferior outcomes to control groups receiving formal exercise therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The currently limited available evidence on PRP for nonoperative treatment of chronic rotator cuff disease suggests that in the short term, PRP injections may not be beneficial. When directly compared with exercise therapy, PRP does not result in superior functional outcomes, pain scores, or range of motion. However, interpretation of this literature is confounded by the lack of reporting of the cytology and characteristics of PRP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II evidence.

Amniotic Tissue Modulation of Knee Pain-A Focus on Osteoarthritis.

The use of intra-articular therapies as sources of growth factors, anti-inflammatory mediators, and medicinal signaling cells for osteoarthritis (OA) is rapidly evolving. Amnion, chorion, amniotic fluid, and the umbilical cord are distinct placental tissues that have been investigated for use in OA. Amniotic membrane (AM) synthesizes a variety of growth factors, cytokines, and vasoactive peptides that modulate inflammation. In addition, they contain amniotic epithelial cells and amniotic mononuclear undifferentiated stromal cells, which have chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation capacity. AMs are also rich sources of hyaluronic acid and proteoglycans, which could play a role in the potential therapeutic relief of OA. Currently, there are several commercially available formulations of AM that differ based on content as well as how they were preserved. Understanding the processing of amniotic tissue is important because of their distinct mechanical and biologic effects of preservation on AM grafts. To date, there have been two preclinical and only one clinical study on the use of AM for OA, which show promising results. Many high level of evidence clinical trials are currently underway investigating the use of AM of OA. Future basic science and clinical research is warranted to better understand the anti-inflammatory and chondroregenerative properties of amniotic tissue and to determine clinically what amniotic tissue product is most efficacious for symptomatic OA.