Improved perioperative narcotic usage patterns in patients undergoing robotic-assisted compared to manual total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) improves accuracy in achieving the planned acetabular cup positioning compared to conventional manual THA (mTHA), but optimal dosage for peri-RA-THA and mTHA pain relief remains unclear. This study aimed to compare pain control with opioids between patients undergoing direct anterior approach THA with the use of a novel, fluoroscopic-assisted RA-THA system compared to opioid consumption associated with fluoroscopic-assisted, manual technique. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis was performed on a consecutive series of patients who received mTHA and fluoroscopy-based RA-THA. The average amount of postoperative narcotics in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) given to each cohort was compared, including during the in-hospital and post-discharge periods. Analyses were performed on the overall cohort, as well as stratified by opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant patients. RESULTS: The RA-THA cohort had significantly lower total postoperative narcotic use compared to the mTHA cohort (103.7 vs. 127.8 MME; P < 0.05). This difference was similarly seen amongst opioid-tolerant patients (123.6 vs. 181.3 MME; P < 0.05). The RA-THA cohort had lower total in-hospital narcotics use compared to the mTHA cohort (42.3 vs. 66.4 MME; P < 0.05), consistent across opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant patients. No differences were seen in post-discharge opioid use between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fluoroscopy-based RA-THA is associated with lower postoperative opioid use, including during the immediate perioperative period, when compared to manual techniques. This may have importance in rapid recovery protocols and mitigating episode burden of care.

Mark-Up Trends in Contemporary Medicare Primary and Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Understanding mark-up ratios (MRs), the ratio between a healthcare institution's submitted charge and the Medicare payment received, for high-volume orthopaedic procedures is imperative to inform policy about price transparency and reducing surprise billing. This analysis examined the MRs for primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) services to Medicare beneficiaries between 2013 and 2019 across healthcare settings and geographic regions. METHODS: A large dataset was queried for all THA and TKA procedures performed by orthopaedic surgeons between 2013 and 2019, using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes for the most frequently used services. Yearly MRs, service counts, average submitted charges, average allowed payments, and average Medicare payments were analyzed. Trends in MRs were assessed. We evaluated 9 THA HCPCS codes, averaging 159,297 procedures a year provided by a mean of 5,330 surgeons. We evaluated 6 TKA HCPCS codes, averaging 290,244 procedures a year provided by a mean of 7,308 surgeons. RESULTS: For knee arthroplasty procedures, a decrease was noted for HCPCS code 27438 (patellar arthroplasty with prosthesis) over the study period (8.30 to 6.62; P = .016) and HCPCS code 27447 (TKA) had the highest median (interquartile range [IQR]) MR (4.73 [3.64 to 6.30]). For revision knee procedures, the highest median (IQR) MR was for HCPCS code 27488 (removal of knee prosthesis; 6.12 [3.83-8.22]). While no trends were noted for both primary and revision hip arthroplasty, median (IQR) MRs in 2019 for primary hip procedures ranged from 3.83 (hemiarthroplasty) to 5.06 (conversion of previous hip surgery to THA) and HCPCS code 27130 (total hip arthroplasty) had a median (IQR) MR of 4.66 (3.58-6.44). For revision hip procedures, MRs ranged from 3.79 (open treatment of femoral fracture or prosthetic arthroplasty) to 6.10 (revision of THA femoral component). Wisconsin had the highest median MR by state (>9) for primary knee, revision knee, and primary hip procedures. CONCLUSION: The MRs for primary and revision THA and TKA procedures were strikingly high, as compared to nonorthopaedic procedures. These findings represent high levels of excess charges billed, which may pose serious financial burdens to patients and must be taken into consideration in future policy discussions to avoid price inflation.

Use of intraoperative technology in total knee arthroplasty is not associated with reductions in postoperative pain.

PURPOSE: Our systematic review and meta-analysis sought to assess how technology-assistance impacts (1) post-operative pain and (2) opioid use in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Four online databases were queried for studies published up to October 2021 that reported on pain and opioid usage between technology-assisted and manual TKA (mTKA) patients. Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models were utilized to calculate pooled mean difference (MDs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs). Subgroup analyses were conducted to isolate robotic-arm assisted (RAA) and computed-assisted navigation (CAN) cohorts. Risk of bias was assessed for all included non-randomized studies with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. For the randomized control trials included in our study, the Detsky scale was applied. RESULTS: Our analysis included 31 studies, reporting on a total of 761,300 TKAs (mTKA: n = 753,554; Computer-Assisted Navigation (CAN): n = 1,309; Robotic-Arm Assisted (RAA): n = 6437). No differences were demonstrated when evaluating WOMAC (MD: 0.00, 95% CI - 0.69 to 0.69; p = 1.00), KSS (MD: 0.01, 95% CI - 1.46 to 1.49; p = 0.99), KOOS (MD - 2.91, 95% CI - 6.17 to 0.34; p = 0.08), and VAS (MD - 0.54, 95% CI - 1.01 to - 0.007; p = 0.02) pain scores between cohorts. There was mixed evidence regarding how opioid consumption differed between TKA techniques. CONCLUSION: The present analysis demonstrated no difference in terms of pain across a variety of utilized patient-reported pain measurements. However, there were mixed results regarding how opioid consumption varied between manual and technology-assisted cohorts, particularly in the immediate post-operative period. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Testicular Dislocation After Unstable Pelvic Ring Injury.

Reproductive and genitourinary complications following pelvic ring injuries have been described; however, testicular dislocation is rare and can cause significant morbidity if not managed appropriately. We describe a case of testicular dislocation after pelvic ring injury and outline the subsequent management and outcome, and seek to identify areas of improvement to ensure expedient and appropriate care in the setting of these injuries. Our case describes a 29-year-old male who presented to a level-one trauma center following a motorcycle collision. An anteroposterior compression type II rotationally unstable pelvic ring was identified on imaging. He was hemodynamically unstable and computed tomography (CT) with angiography was ordered. Arterial extravasation was noted from the bilateral anterior internal iliac arteries, which were subsequently embolized by interventional radiology. However, no concomitant genitourinary injury was identified at the time of CT. After resuscitation, the pelvis was stabilized with an anterior symphyseal plate and bilateral sacroiliac screws. During the anterior pelvic approach, the patient's dislocated testicle was surprisingly discovered inferior to the pubis. Urology was consulted intra-operatively, and the testicle was successfully relocated. At the final follow-up, the pelvic ring was healed without any noticeable urogenital complication. While testicular dislocation has been reported in the setting of pelvic ring injury, a paucity of information exists regarding management, implications, and areas for improvement in the identification of these injuries. Therefore, in cases of pelvic ring injury with significant trauma, radiologists, traumatologists, and orthopedic surgeons should adopt a multi-disciplinary approach in diligently attempting to rule out testicular dislocation pre-operatively. Intra-operatively, examination under anesthesia and careful operative technique are important in preventing iatrogenic injury.