Re-revision Knee Arthroplasty in a Tertiary Center: Infection and Multiple Previous Surgeries Were Associated With Poor Early Clinical and Functional Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of re-revision knee arthroplasty (re-revision KA) is increasing and associated with high complication and failure rates. The aim of this study was to investigate re-revision rates, complications, and patient-reported outcomes following re-revision KA and factors associated with poor outcome. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 206 patients (250 knees) undergoing re-revision KA at a major revision center from 2015 to 2018. The mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 0 to 61) and mean age at re-revision KA was 69 years (range, 31 to 91 years). The main indications for surgery were prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 171/250, 68.4%) and aseptic loosening (n = 25/250, 10.0%). We compared re-revision rates, joint function, and complications for aseptic and infective indications. Logistic regressions were performed to identify risk factors for further reoperation. RESULTS: The estimated re-revision rates at 2 years were 28.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.7-35.9) and at 4 years were 42.0% (95% CI: 32.8-52.6). Mean Oxford Knee Score was 26 points (range, 1 to 48). Mean EuroQoL-5D-5L utility was 0.539 (range, -0.511 to 1.000). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that PJI (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% CI 1.06-5.40, P = .036), greater number of previous surgeries (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.33, P = .008), and higher Elixhauser score (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.13, P = .045) were independently associated to further surgery. CONCLUSION: Re-revision KA carried a high risk of early failure. Multiple revised joints and patients with more comorbidities had worse function. Patients undergoing re-revision KA for PJI should be counseled to expect higher failure rates and complications than patients who have aseptic indications.

Indications and techniques for non-articulating spacers in massive bone loss following prosthetic knee joint infection: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a destructive complication of knee replacement surgery (KR). In two-stage revision a spacer is required to maintain limb length and alignment and provide a stable limb on which to mobilise. Spacers may be articulating or static with the gold standard spacer yet to be defined. The aims of this scoping review were to summarise the types of static spacer used to treat PJI after KR, their indications for use and early complication rates. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review based on the Joanna Briggs Institute's "JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis" Scoping review reported following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 2005 to 2022 for studies on the use of static spacers for PJI after KR. RESULTS: 41 studies (1230 patients/knees) were identified describing 42 static spacer constructs. Twenty-three (23/42 [54.2%]) incorporated cement augmented with metalwork, while nineteen (19/42, [45.9%]) were made of cement alone. Spacers were most frequently anchored in the diaphysis (22/42, [53.3%]), particularly in the setting of extensive bone loss (mean AORI Type = F3/T3; 11/15 studies 78.3% diaphyseal anchoring). 7.1% (79 of 1117 knees) of static spacers had a complication requiring further surgery prior to planned second stage with the most common complication being infection (86.1%). CONCLUSIONS: This study has summarised the large variety in static spacer constructs used for staged revision KR for PJI. Static spacers were associated with a high risk of complications and further work in this area is required to improve the quality of care in this vulnerable group.

Preoperative Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Polymerase Chain Reaction Test at Between 48 and 72 Hours Preoperatively is Safe for Patients Undergoing Primary and Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicentre International Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing lower limb arthroplasty who are severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive at the time of surgery have a high risk of mortality. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Care Excellence and the British Orthopaedic Association advise self-isolation for 14 days preoperatively in patients at a high risk of adverse outcomes due to COVID-19. The aim of the study is to assess whether preoperative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 could be performed at between 48 and 72 hours preoperatively with specific advice about minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 restricted to between PCR and admission. METHODS: A multicentre, international, observational cohort study of 1,000 lower limb arthroplasty cases was performed. The dual primary outcomes were 30-day conversion to SARS-CoV-2 positive and 30-day SARS-CoV-2 mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day SARS-CoV-2 morbidity. RESULTS: Of the 1,000 cases, 935 (94%) had a PCR between 48 and 72 hours preoperatively. All cases were admitted to and had surgery through a COVID-free pathway. Primary knee arthroplasty was performed in 41% of cases, primary hip arthroplasty in 40%, revision knee arthroplasty in 11%, and revision hip arthroplasty in 9%. Six percent of operations were emergency operations. No cases of SARS-CoV-2 were identified within the first 30 days. CONCLUSION: Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test between 48 and 72 hours preoperatively with advice about minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 restricted to between PCR and admission in conjunction with a COVID-free pathway is safe for patients undergoing primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty. Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test alone may be safe but further adequately powered studies are required. This information is important for shared decision making with patients during the current pandemic.

Mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing mobile-bearing with fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in terms of all-cause revision rates, aspetic loosening, knee functional scores, range of motion and radiographic lucent lines and osteolysis. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and Web of Science were searched up to January 2020. Randomized controlled trials that compared primary mobile-bearing with fixed-bearing TKA, reporting at least one of the outcomes of interest, at a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. All outcomes of interest were pooled at short-term (< 5 years), mid-term (5 to 9 years) and long-term (> = 10 years) follow-up intervals. RESULTS: A total of 70 eligible articles were included in the qualitative and statistical analyses. There was no difference between mobile-bearing or fixed-bearing TKA at short-term, mid-term and long-term follow-ups in all outcome measures including all-cause revision rate, aseptic loosening, oxford knee score, knee society score, Hospital for Special Surgery score, maximum knee flexion, radiographic lucent lines and radiographic osteolysis. CONCLUSION: The current level of evidence demonstrated that both mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing designs achieved excellent outcomes, yet it does not prove the theoretical advantages of the mobile-bearing insert over its fixed-bearing counterpart. The use of either design could therefore be supported based on the outcomes assessed in this study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, Therapeutic.

Patient-Reported Function and Quality of Life After Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 10,727 Patients from the NHS PROMs Program.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). METHODS: A total of 10,727 patients undergoing elective rTKA were recruited from the UK National Health Service PROMs data set from 2013 to 2019. PROMs were collected at baseline and six months to assess joint function (Oxford Knee Score, OKS) and quality of life (EQ-5D). Associations with a change in the OKS (COKS) were investigated through multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The mean COKS was 12.4 (standard deviation 10.7) points. A total of 6776 of 10,329 (65.6%) patients demonstrated increase in the OKS above the minimal important change of 7.5 points. The median change in the EQ-5D utility was 0.227 (interquartile range 0.000 to 0.554). A total of 4917 of 9279 (53.0%) patients achieved a composite endpoint of improvement greater than the minimal important change for joint function and 'better' QoL as per the Paretian analysis. A total of 7477 of 10,727 (69.7%) patients reported satisfaction with rTKA. A total of 7947 of 10,727 (74.1%) patients felt surgery was a success. A total of 4888 of 10,632 (46.0%) patients reported one or more adverse events. A higher preoperative OKS was associated with a lower COKS (coefficient -0.63 [95% confidence interval -0.67 to -0.60]). Other factors associated with a lower COKS were postoperative complication(s), age under 60 years, longer duration of knee problems, patients who identified as disabled, problems in EQ-5D dimensions of anxiety/depression and self-care, comorbid conditions (circulatory problems, diabetes, and depression), and earlier year of procedure in the data set. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients experienced a meaningful improvement in joint function after rTKA. However, there was a high frequency of patient-reported complications. These findings may enable better informed discussion of the risks and benefits of discretionary rTKA.

Clinical Outcome of Free Latissimus Dorsi Flaps for Coverage of Soft Tissue Defects in Multiply Revised Total Knee Arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: Multiply revised total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) may present with large anterior soft tissue defects, which can be challenging to reconstruct. In the rare cases where local flaps are insufficient, we use free latissimus dorsi (LD) myocutaneous flaps to achieve soft tissue coverage. This study looked to determine implant survivorship, infection status, and patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing simultaneous revision TKA and LD flaps in a tertiary unit. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 18 consecutive patients who had revision TKA and free LD flap reconstruction. Twelve were male and the median age was 65 years (range, 35-83). Patients had undergone a median of 4 previous arthroplasty procedures (range, 3-6). Median follow-up was 49 months (range, 18 to 110). The primary outcome was revision-free implant survival. Secondary outcomes included soft tissue integrity, Oxford Knee Score, and EuroQol 5-domain score at latest follow-up. RESULTS: At latest follow-up, 14 of 18 patients had maintained their implant. Seven patients were infection-free, 7 were on suppressive antibiotics with the implant in situ, and 4 had undergone above-knee amputation. Five-year implant survival was 75% (95% confidence interval, 46-90). At median follow-up (49 months), mean Oxford Knee Score was 13.4 (range, 2-35) and mean EuroQol 5-domain index was 0.071 (range:-0.427 to 0.747). CONCLUSION: LD free flap is a viable option for limb salvage in patients with large anterior soft tissue defects following multiple revisions of TKA. However, functional outcomes can be poor and there is a significant risk of ongoing infection and amputation in this complex patient cohort.

Partial or total knee replacement? Identifying patients' information needs on knee replacement surgery: a qualitative study to inform a decision aid.

PURPOSE: For patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis, joint replacement is a widely used and successful operation to help improve quality-of-life when non-operative measures have failed. For a significant proportion of patients there is a choice between a partial or total knee replacement. Decision aids can help people weigh up the need for and benefits of treatment against possible risks and side-effects. This study explored patients' experiences of deciding to undergo knee replacement surgery to identify information priorities, to inform a knee replacement decision aid. METHODS: Four focus groups were held with 31 patients who were candidates for both partial and total knee replacement surgery. Two focus groups included patients with no prior knee replacement surgery (pre-surgery); two with patients with one knee already replaced and who were candidates for a second surgery on their other knee (post-surgery). Data were analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Participants described a process of arriving at 'readiness for surgery' a turning point where the need for treatment outweighed their concerns. Referral and personal factors influenced their decision-making and expectations of surgery in the hope to return to a former self. Those with previous knee surgery offered insights into whether their expectations were met. 'Information for decisions' details the practicality and the optimal timing for the delivery of a knee replacement decision aid. In particular, participants would have valued hearing about the experiences of other patients and seeing detailed pictures of both surgical options. Information priorities were identified to include in a decision aid for knee replacement surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' experiences of surgical decision-making have much in common with the Necessity-Concerns Framework. Whilst originally developed to understand drug treatment decisions and adherence, it provides a useful lens to understand decision-making about surgery. The use of a decision aid could enhance decision-making on knee replacement surgery. Ultimately, patients' understanding of the risks and benefits of both surgical options could be improved and in turn, help informed decision-making. The knee replacement decision aid is perceived as a useful tool to be associated with other detailed information resources as recommended.

Manipulation Under Anesthetic After Primary Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With a Higher Rate of Subsequent Revision Surgery.

AIM: To determine the association between manipulation under anesthetic (MUA) after primary knee arthroplasty and subsequent revision surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty from April 2011 to April 2016 with minimum 1-year follow-up to April 2017 were identified from the national hospital episode statistics for England. The first arthroplasty per patient, per side, was included; cases with a record of subsequent infection or periprosthetic fracture were excluded. Patients undergoing MUA within 1 year to the same knee were identified, defining the populations for the MUA and non-MUA cohorts. Mortality-adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (revision arthroplasty) was performed to a maximum of 6 years. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the hazard for revision, adjusting for type of primary arthroplasty, gender, age group, year, comorbidity index, obesity, regional deprivation, rurality, and ethnicity. RESULTS: A total of 309,650 primary arthroplasty cases (309,650 patients) were included. MUA within 1 year was recorded in 6882 patients (2.22%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.17-2.28) defining the MUA cohort; all others were included in the parallel non-MUA cohort. At 6 years, the mortality-adjusted estimated implant survival rate in the MUA cohort was 91.2% (95% CI, 90.0-92.2) in comparison to 98.1% (95% CI, 98.0-98.2) in the non-MUA cohort. In the fully adjusted model, this corresponded to an adjusted hazard for revision of 5.03 (hazard ratio; 95% CI, 4.55-5.57). CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent MUA within 1 year of primary arthroplasty were at a 5-fold increased risk of subsequent revision even after excluding cases of infection or fracture. Further investigation of the etiology of stiffness after primary knee arthroplasty and the optimal treatment options to improve outcomes is justified.

Knee replacement.

Knee replacement surgery is one of the most commonly done and cost-effective musculoskeletal surgical procedures. The numbers of cases done continue to grow worldwide, with substantial variation in utilisation rates across regions and countries. The main indication for surgery remains painful knee osteoarthritis with reduced function and quality of life. The threshold for intervention is not well defined, and is influenced by many factors including patient and surgeon preference. Most patients have a very good clinical outcome after knee replacement, but multiple studies have reported that 20% or more of patients do not. So despite excellent long-term survivorship, more work is required to enhance this procedure and development is rightly focused on increasing the proportion of patients who have successful pain relief after surgery. Changing implant design has historically been a target for improving outcome, but there is greater recognition that improvements can be achieved by better implantation methods, avoiding complications, and improving perioperative care for patients, such as enhanced recovery programmes. New technologies are likely to advance future knee replacement care further, but their introduction must be regulated and monitored with greater rigour to ensure patient safety.

Over two decades of orthopaedic surgery in patients with inhibitors-Quantifying the complication of bleeding.

Patients with haemophilia who have developed inhibitors against factor VIII (FVIII) or factor IX present a significant concern to those surgeons who operate on them. The evidence base for bypassing agents such as recombinant factor VIIa and activated prothrombin complex concentrate has amassed over several decades. The literature is open to positive interpretation on the successful use of these agents in the treatment of inhibitor-positive patients. However, there are equally persistent concerns amongst surgeons, in particular orthopaedic surgeons, regarding the high complication rate of bleeding. To explore and quantify this concern, we present a literature review spanning two decades of publications on haemophilia patients with inhibitors undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Irrespective of the progress made with haemostatic protocols, trepidation on embarking on surgery is valid. The high risk of bleeding is a function of the inherent complexity of the disease and rightfully translates into difficulties in its management. Combined with the prospect of orthopaedic surgery, those involved in the care of such patients are justified in their continued anxiety and diligence when considering the benefits in quality of life against the prevalent complications.

ACL and meniscal injuries increase the risk of primary total knee replacement for osteoarthritis: a matched case-control study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether ACL injury (ACLi) or meniscal injury increases the risk of end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) resulting in total knee replacement (TKR). METHODS: A matched case-control study of all TKRs performed in the UK between January 1990 and July 2011 and recorded in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) was undertaken. The CPRD contains longitudinal data on approximately 3.6 million patients. Two controls were selected for each case of TKR, matched on age, sex and general practitioner location as a proxy for socioeconomic status. Individuals with inflammatory arthritis were excluded. The odds of having TKR for individuals with a CPRD-recorded ACLi were compared with those without ACLi using conditional logistic regression, after adjustment for body mass index, previous knee fracture and meniscal injury. The adjusted odds of TKR in individuals with a recorded meniscal injury compared with those without were calculated. RESULTS: After exclusion of individuals with inflammatory arthritis, there were 49 723 in the case group and 104 353 controls. 153 (0.31%) cases had a history of ACLi compared with 41 (0.04%) controls. The adjusted OR of TKR after ACLi was 6.96 (95% CI 4.73 to 10.31). 4217 (8.48%) individuals in the TKR group had a recorded meniscal injury compared with 669 (0.64%) controls. The adjusted OR of TKR after meniscal injury was 15.24 (95% CI 13.88 to 16.69). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that ACLi is associated with a sevenfold increased odds of TKR resulting from OA. Meniscal injury is associated with a 15-fold increase odds of TKR for OA.

Objectively Assessing Intraoperative Arthroscopic Skills Performance and the Transfer of Simulation Training in Knee Arthroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To objectively investigate the transfer validity of simulation training using wireless elbow-worn motion sensors intraoperatively to assess whether surgical simulation leads to improvements in intraoperative arthroscopic performance. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, postgraduate year 2 to 3 trainees in nationally approved orthopaedic surgery posts were randomized to standard junior residency training (control group) or standard training plus additional weekly simulation training (intervention group). Both groups performed a supervised real-life diagnostic knee arthroscopy in the operating room at 13 weeks. Performance was measured using wireless elbow-worn motion sensors recording objective surgical performance metrics: number of hand movements, smoothness, and time taken. A participant-supervisor performance ratio was used to adjust for variation in case mix and difficulty. The study took place in a surgical simulation suite and the orthopaedic operating rooms of a university teaching hospital. RESULTS: The intervention group objectively outperformed the control group in all outcome metrics. Procedures performed by the intervention group required fewer hand movements (544 [interquartile range (IQR), 465-593] vs 893 [IQR, 747-1,242]; P < .001), had smoother movements (25,842 ms-3 [IQR, 20,867-27,468 ms-3] vs 36,846 ms-3 [IQR, 29,840-53,949 ms-3]; P < .001), and took less time (320 seconds [IQR, 294-392 seconds] vs 573 seconds [IQR, 477-860 seconds]; P < .001) than those performed by the control group. The cases were comparable between the groups. Standardized to the supervisor's performance, the intervention group required fewer hand movements (1.9 [IQR, 1.5-2.1] vs 3.3 [IQR, 2.2-4.8]; P = .0091), required less time (1.2 [IQR, 1.1-1.7] vs 2.6 [IQR, 1.6-3.0]; P = .0037), and were smoother (2.1 [IQR, 1.8-2.8] vs 4.3 [IQR, 2.8-5.4]; P = .0037) than the control group, but they did not perform as well as their supervisors. CONCLUSIONS: This study uses intraoperative motion-analysis technology to objectively show that surgical simulation training improves actual intraoperative technical skills performance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The described wireless objective assessment method complements the subjective observational performance assessments commonly used. Further studies are required to assess how these measures of intraoperative performance correlate to patient outcomes. Intraoperative motion analysis is translatable across surgical specialties, offering potential for objective assessment of progression through competency-based training, revalidation, and talent selection for specialist training.

The impact of patient-specific instrumentation on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled study.

PURPOSE: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been proposed as a means of improving surgical accuracy and ease of implantation during technically challenging procedures such as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The purpose of this prospective randomised controlled trial was to compare the accuracy of implantation and functional outcome of mobile-bearing medial UKAs implanted with and without PSI by experienced UKA surgeons. METHODS: Mobile-bearing medial UKAs were implanted in 43 patients using either PSI guides or conventional instrumentation. Intra-operative measurements, meniscal bearing size implanted, and post-operative radiographic analyses were performed to assess component positioning. Functional outcome was determined using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). RESULTS: PSI guides could not be used in three cases due to concerns regarding accuracy and registration onto native anatomy, particularly on the tibial side. In general, similar component alignment and positioning was achieved using the two systems (n.s. for coronal/sagittal alignment and tibial coverage). The PSI group had greater tibial slope (p = 0.029). The control group had a higher number of optimum size meniscal bearing inserted (95 vs 52%; p = 0.001). There were no differences in OKS improvements (n.s). CONCLUSION: Component positioning for the two groups was similar for the femur but less accurate on the tibial side using PSI, often with some unnecessarily deep resections of the tibial plateau. Although PSI was comparable to conventional instrumentation based on OKS improvements at 12 months, we continue to use conventional instrumentation for UKA at our institution until further improvements to the PSI guides can be demonstrated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level I.

Operating Room Traffic Increases Aerosolized Particles and Compromises the Air Quality: A Simulated Study.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to prevent bacterial fallout and reduce particle count in the operating room (OR) are key components of preventing periprosthetic joint infection. Although OR traffic control is an important factor, a quantitative study has not been performed to investigate the influence of personnel and door opening on OR air quality. This simulated study aimed to examine the influence of these 2 factors on particle density in OR with and without the laminar air flow (LAF). METHODS: Both experiments took place within an empty OR of an arthroplasty unit equipped with an LAF system. First, the number of particles in the air was counted using a particle counting apparatus while 9 persons entered the room, one every 15 minutes. Second, the door was opened and closed starting with zero door openings per minute and increasing to 4 in 15-minute increments. Both experiments were performed once with the LAF turned on and once without. RESULTS: The number of personnel in the OR and the number of door openings per minute correlate with the density of particles. Both relationships were significantly reduced by turning the LAF on (correlation coefficients <0.4). With the LAF being turned on, the particle density per person decreased from 211.19 to 18.19 particles/ft3 (P < .001) and the particle density per rate of door openings declined from 117.80 to 1.90 particles/ft3 (P = .017). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that personnel and door opening are a major source of particles in the OR air. Controlling traffic is critical for reduction of particles and is likely to be a key preventative strategy in reducing periprosthetic joint infection. LAF is protective against the negative influence of number of people and door openings.

Clinical Outcome of Massive Endoprostheses Used for Managing Periprosthetic Joint Infections of the Hip and Knee.

BACKGROUND: Endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) is an option for management of massive bone loss resulting from infection around failed lower limb implants. The aim of this study is to determine the mid-term outcome of EPRs performed in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and infected failed osteosyntheses around the hip and knee joint and identify factors that influence it. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all hip and knee EPRs performed between 2007 and 2014 for the management of chronic infection following complex arthroplasty or fracture fixation. Data recorded included indication for EPR, number of previous surgeries, comorbidities, and organism identified. Outcome measures included PJI eradication rate, complications, implant survival, mortality, and functional outcome (Oxford Hip or Knee Score). RESULTS: Sixty-nine EPRs (29 knees and 40 hips) were performed with a mean age of 68 years (43-92). Polymicrobial growth was detected in 36% of cases, followed by coagulase-negative staphylococci (28%) and Staphylococcus aureus (10%). Recurrence of infection occurred in 19 patients (28%): 5 were treated with irrigation and debridement, 5 with revision, 1 with above-knee amputation, and 8 remain on long-term antibiotics. PJI eradication was achieved in 50 patients (72%); the chance of PJI eradication was greater in hips (83%) than in knees (59%) (P = .038). The 5-year implant survivorship was 81% (95% confidence interval 74-88). The mean Oxford Hip Score and Oxford Knee Score were 22 (4-39) and 21 (6-43), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study supports the use of EPRs for eradication of PJI in complex, multiply revised cases. We describe PJI eradication rate of 72% with acceptable functional outcome.

The Role of Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Implant-Related Infections in Orthopaedics and Trauma.

Diagnosis of implant-related (periprosthetic joint) infections poses a major challenge to infection disease physicians and orthopaedic surgeons. Conventional diagnostic tests continue to suffer from issues of accuracy and feasibility. Biomarkers are used throughout medicine for diagnostic and prognostic purposes, as they are able to objectively determine the presence of a disease or a biological state. There is increasing evidence to support the measurement of specific biomarkers in serum and/or synovial fluid of patients with suspected periprosthetic joint infections. Promising serum biomarkers include interleukin (IL)-4, IL-6, tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, procalcitonin, soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (sICAM-1), and D-dimer. In addition to c-reactive protein and leucocyte esterase, promising biomarkers that can be measured in synovial fluid include antimicrobial proteins such as human ß-defensin (HBD)-2 and human ß-defensin (HBD)-3, and cathelicidin LL-37, as well as several interleukins such as IL-1ß, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17, TNF- α, interferon-δ, and vascular endothelial growth factor.

Simulation-Based Training Platforms for Arthroscopy: A Randomized Comparison of Virtual Reality Learning to Benchtop Learning.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a virtual reality (VR) arthroscopy simulator or benchtop (BT) arthroscopy simulator showed superiority as a training tool. METHODS: Arthroscopic novices were randomized to a training program on a BT or a VR knee arthroscopy simulator. The VR simulator provided user performance feedback. Individuals performed a diagnostic arthroscopy on both simulators before and after the training program. Performance was assessed using wireless objective motion analysis and a global rating scale. RESULTS: The groups (8 in the VR group, 9 in the BT group) were well matched at baseline across all parameters (P > .05). Training on each simulator resulted in significant performance improvements across all parameters (P < .05). BT training conferred a significant improvement in all parameters when trainees were reassessed on the VR simulator (P < .05). In contrast, VR training did not confer improvement in performance when trainees were reassessed on the BT simulator (P > .05). BT-trained subjects outperformed VR-trained subjects in all parameters during final assessments on the BT simulator (P < .05). There was no difference in objective performance between VR-trained and BT-trained subjects on final VR simulator wireless objective motion analysis assessment (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Both simulators delivered improvements in arthroscopic skills. BT training led to skills that readily transferred to the VR simulator. Skills acquired after VR training did not transfer as readily to the BT simulator. Despite trainees receiving automated metric feedback from the VR simulator, the results suggest a greater gain in psychomotor skills for BT training. Further work is required to determine if this finding persists in the operating room. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study suggests that there are differences in skills acquired on different simulators and skills learnt on some simulators may be more transferable. Further work in identifying user feedback metrics that enhance learning is also required.

Can Surgical Trainees Achieve Arthroscopic Competence at the End of Training Programs? A Cross-sectional Study Highlighting the Impact of Working Time Directives.

PURPOSE: To provide training guidance on procedure numbers by assessing how the number of previously performed arthroscopic procedures relate to both competent and expert performance in simulated arthroscopic shoulder tasks. METHODS: A cross-sectional study that assessed simulated shoulder arthroscopic performance was undertaken. A total of 45 participants of varying experience performed 2 validated tasks: a simple diagnostic task and a more complex Bankart labral repair task. All participants provided logbook numbers for previously performed arthroscopies. Performance was assessed with the Global Rating Scale and motion analysis. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted to identify optimum cut points for task proficiency at both "competent" and "expert" levels. RESULTS: Increasing surgical experience resulted in significantly better performance for both tasks as assessed by Global Rating Scale or motion analysis (P < .0001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses demonstrated 52 previous arthroscopies were needed to perform to a competent level at the diagnostic task and 248 to be competent at the complex task. To perform at an expert level, 290 and 476 previous arthroscopies, respectively, were needed. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides quantified guidance for arthroscopic training and highlights the positive relationship between arthroscopic case load and arthroscopic competency. We have estimated that the number of arthroscopies required to achieve competency in a basic arthroscopic task exceed those recommended in some countries. These estimates provide useful guidance to those responsible for training program. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The numbers to achieve competent arthroscopic performance in the assessed simulated tasks exceed what is recommended and what is possible during surgical training programs in some countries.

Newly acquired arthroscopic skills: Are they transferable during simulator training of other joints?

PURPOSE: This randomized study investigates whether novices learning simulation-based arthroscopic skills in one anatomical joint environment can immediately transfer their learnt skills to another joint. METHODS: Medical students were randomized to a simulated diagnostic knee or shoulder arthroscopic task on benchtop training models. After nine task repetitions over 3 weeks on one model, each participant undertook the simulation task of the other anatomical joint. Performance was objectively measured using a validated electromagnetic motion analysis system and a validated global rating scale (GRS). RESULTS: Eighteen students participated; eight started the knee task and ten the shoulder task. All participants demonstrated a learning curve in all parameters during task repetition (time taken, hand path length, number of hand movements and GRS scores; p < 0.001) with learning effects >1 SD from initial performance (range 1.1-2.2 SD). When the groups swapped models, there was no immediate evidence of skill transfer, with a significant drop in performance between the final training episode and the transfer task (all parameters p < 0.003). In particular, the transfer task performance was no better than the first episode performance on that model by these novices. CONCLUSION: This study showed basic arthroscopic skills did not immediately transfer to an unfamiliar anatomical environment within a simulated setting. These findings have important clinical implications with regard to surgical training as they potentially challenge the assumption that arthroscopic skills acquired in one joint are universally transferrable to other joints. Future orthopaedic simulation training should aim to deliver exposure to a greater variety of arthroscopic procedures and joint environments. This would allow trainees to become familiar with the different arthroscopic setting before undertaking real surgery and consequently improve patient safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level II.

Validation of the updated ArthroS simulator: face and construct validity of a passive haptic virtual reality simulator with novel performance metrics.

PURPOSE: To assess the construct and face validity of ArthroS, a passive haptic VR simulator. A secondary aim was to evaluate the novel performance metrics produced by this simulator. METHODS: Two groups of 30 participants, each divided into novice, intermediate or expert based on arthroscopic experience, completed three separate tasks on either the knee or shoulder module of the simulator. Performance was recorded using 12 automatically generated performance metrics and video footage of the arthroscopic procedures. The videos were blindly assessed using a validated global rating scale (GRS). Participants completed a survey about the simulator's realism and training utility. RESULTS: This new simulator demonstrated construct validity of its tasks when evaluated against a GRS (p ≤ 0.003 in all cases). Regarding it's automatically generated performance metrics, established outputs such as time taken (p ≤ 0.001) and instrument path length (p ≤ 0.007) also demonstrated good construct validity. However, two-thirds of the proposed 'novel metrics' the simulator reports could not distinguish participants based on arthroscopic experience. Face validity assessment rated the simulator as a realistic and useful tool for trainees, but the passive haptic feedback (a key feature of this simulator) is rated as less realistic. CONCLUSION: The ArthroS simulator has good task construct validity based on established objective outputs, but some of the novel performance metrics could not distinguish between surgical experience. The passive haptic feedback of the simulator also needs improvement. If simulators could offer automated and validated performance feedback, this would facilitate improvements in the delivery of training by allowing trainees to practise and self-assess.