Artificial intelligence-based three-dimensional templating for total joint arthroplasty planning: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current status of research on the application of artificial intelligence (AI)-based three-dimensional (3D) templating in preoperative planning of total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: This scoping review followed the PRISMA, PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and five stage methodological framework for scoping reviews. Studies of patients undergoing primary or revision joint arthroplasty surgery that utilised AI-based 3D templating for surgical planning were included. Outcome measures included dataset and model development characteristics, AI performance metrics, and time performance. After AI-based 3D planning, the accuracy of component size and placement estimation and postoperative outcome data were collected. RESULTS: Nine studies satisfied inclusion criteria including a focus on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based AI templating for use in hip or knee arthroplasty. AI-based 3D templating systems reduced surgical planning time and improved implant size/position and imaging feature estimation compared to conventional radiographic templating. Several components of data processing and model development and testing were insufficiently covered in the studies included in this scoping review. CONCLUSIONS: AI-based 3D templating systems have the potential to improve preoperative planning for joint arthroplasty surgery. This technology offers more accurate and personalized preoperative planning, which has potential to improve functional outcomes for patients. However, deficiencies in several key areas, including data handling, model development, and testing, can potentially hinder the reproducibility and reliability of the methods proposed. As such, further research is needed to definitively evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of these systems.

A critical appraisal of Evicore's guidelines for advanced diagnostic imaging of the spine for lower extremity pain with neurological features.

Background: This analysis aims to evaluate the methodological quality of Evicore's spinal imaging guidelines for lower extremity pain with neurological features with or without lower back pain by leveraging the AGREE II tool. The AGREE II tool provides a framework to assess guideline development. It is well validated and has been used to evaluate many other guidelines previously. Methods: Five appraisers used the AGREE II appraisal tool to conduct a comprehensive review of Evicore's spinal imaging guidelines for lower extremity pain with neurological features. Appraisers provided an overall assessment of the guidelines as well as specific scores pertaining to domains including scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. Results: Appraisers assigned numerical grades of 2, 2, 2, 3 and 4 (out of 7 total points, with 7 being the highest) for overall quality of the guidelines. Three appraisers recommended use of the guideline with modifications and two appraisers did not recommend the guideline. The AGREE II ratings had good reliability across the different raters [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) =0.881, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77, 0.94]. Conclusions: Evicore's guidelines would greatly benefit from increased identification and diversification of guideline development parties and stakeholders, increased rigor of development including a more robust discussion of the body of evidence and its strengths and limitations, and incorporation of more explicit suggestions for implementation of guideline recommendations by healthcare providers.

Medical malpractice litigation after total shoulder arthroplasty: a comprehensive analysis based on the Westlaw legal database.

INTRODUCTION: Orthopedic surgery is one of the most common subspecialties subject to medical malpractice claims. Although total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is associated with favorable patient outcomes and relatively low complication rates, surgeons performing this procedure may be subject to malpractice litigation leading to significant economic and psychological burden on the provider. The purpose of this study is to characterize and describe malpractice claims against orthopedic surgeons performing TSA using the Westlaw legal database. METHODS: The Westlaw legal database was queried for all cases related to TSA using the terms "malpractice" AND "shoulder replacement" OR "shoulder arthroplasty." Cases were excluded if the defendant was not an orthopedic surgeon, the procedure involved was not a TSA, or if the patient was a minor. Patient demographics, causes cited for litigation, case outcomes, and indemnity payments were analyzed to determine common factors that lead plaintiffs to pursue legal action. RESULTS: Thirty-five TSA cases were identified that met inclusion criteria. The mean plaintiff age was 55 years with 63.6% female. The most common category of negligence alleged was intraoperative error, which occurred in 25 claims (71%). The most common types of damages incurred were nerve injury (23%), functional limitation (20%), and infection (17%). Overall, 27 cases (77%) resulted in a defense verdict. Four cases (11%) resulted in settlements and 4 cases (11%) resulted in plaintiff verdicts. The average inflation-adjusted monetary award in these cases was $1,619,919 (standard deviation, $1,689,452). DISCUSSION: This study provides a comprehensive summary of malpractice claims and associated outcomes in TSA. Given the rapidly increasing rate of TSA in the United States and the burden of associated malpractice claims, understanding potential legal implications of TSA is of great value to orthopedic surgeons. Intraoperative error was the category of negligence cited most commonly in TSA malpractice claims. Nerve injury, functional limitation, and infection were the most commonly cited specific damages. These findings highlight the need for orthopedic surgeons to educate patients regarding potential postoperative complications while continuing to focus on minimizing their occurrence.

Synergistic effects of robotic surgery and IPACK nerve block on reduction of opioid consumption in total knee arthroplasty.

Background: There are numerous strategies to combat postoperative analgesia and expedite recovery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to determine opioid consumption, length of stay, and functional outcomes after robotic versus standard TKA in the setting of various regional pain modalities. Methods: A consecutive series of patients treated with unilateral primary robotic or standard TKA from January 2018-February 2021 were retrospectively identified. Regional pain modalities included peri-articular injection (PAI), adductor canal block (ACB), and infiltration between popliteal artery and capsule of knee (IPACK). Patient demographics, operative/perioperative variables, and postoperative function were recorded. Daily opiate consumption was calculated as morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Multivariate regression was performed to control for age, sex, and race. Results: After review, 283 patients (177 Females; 106 Males) were included. Robotic TKA patients received IPACK + ACB (36), while standard TKA patients received either ACB (45), IPACK + ACB (167), or PAI (35). Daily inpatient opioid consumption in the standard IPACK + ACB (p = 0.02) and robotic IPACK + ACB groups (p = 0.0001) was significantly lower compared to standard ACB. When combined with IPACK block, robotic procedures synergistically lowered opiate consumption (p = 0.004) compared to standard procedures and led to earlier discharge (p = 0.003). The robotic IPACK + ACB cohort also demonstrated improved early ambulation compared to standard ACB, (p = 0.05), whereas the same benefit was not seen for patients who received IPACK during standard TKA. Conclusions: The utilization of IPACK block decreases inpatient postoperative opioid requirements following TKA. Robotic TKA and IPACK block appeared to have a synergistic effect on opioid consumption and postoperative recovery.

Leveraging the COVID-19 Research Spike to Provide Medical Students with Practical Experience in Data Appraisal and Grant Review.

In April and May 2020, a group of students and professors from the Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine (HMSOM) created an elective to review pre-selected, de-identified COVID-19-related research proposals by physicians and researchers within the Hackensack Meridian Health (HMH) network. Students discussed and rated each proposal's significance, innovation, and approach using grading criteria that paralleled the National Institute of Health's (NIH) study section-based grant review process. In discussing these topics under the guidance of faculty with experience in writing and reviewing research grants, students gained a better understanding of what constitutes a quality research study and a compelling grant proposal.