Determining the factors associated with a prolonged length of stay for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients undergoing posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion in a single-payer health care system: are these factors different than those in the United States?

INTRODUCTION: Rapid recovery pathways (RRP) for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients undergoing posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) have been shown to be successful in reducing hospital length of stay (LOS). Although the majority of patients are discharged within 3 days, some patients require longer hospital admission. Previous studies in the United States have identified predictors of prolonged LOS for this patient population. The goal of this project was to determine if these predictors are the same for Canadian scoliosis patients and to identify those features which are different under this single-payer system. METHODS: A RRP for scoliosis surgery was implemented in March 2015 at a single, tertiary referral children's hospital in Canada. Previously identified features, along with numerous other patient factors, were collected. Spearman correlations were used to determine the factors most associated with hospital LOS and those factors were used in a multivariable regression model. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients were included in the analysis. Of the previously identified patient factors, only receiving a peri-operative transfusion was found to be significant (ρ = 0.24; p = 0.002). None of the other pre-identified variables were found to be significantly correlated with LOS. Variables not previously examined that were found to be significantly correlated with hospital LOS included ASA status (ρ = 0.19, p = 0.046), fusion involving both the thoracic and lumbar spine (ρ = 0.18, p = 0.025), and receiving celecoxib on post-operative day 1 (ρ = - 0.16; p = 0.038). The features that had the greatest association with LOS through multivariable regression was receiving a blood transfusion (B = 0.48; 95%CI 0.096-0.89; p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that many of the features found to be significantly correlated with prolonged hospital LOS in the United States are not transferable to the Canadian healthcare system. This is important for the Canadian, and other surgeons in a single-payer system, in order to identify pre-operative or immediate post-operative factors that may extend patient LOS following PSIF and plan resources accordingly. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; therapeutic.

Arthroscopy Association of Canada Position Statement on Opioid Prescription After Arthroscopic Surgery.

Background: Despite the ongoing opioid epidemic, most patients are still prescribed a significant number of opioid medications for pain management after arthroscopic surgery. There is a need for consensus among orthopaedic surgeons and solutions to aid providers in analgesic strategies that reduce the use of opioid pain medications. Purpose: This position statement was developed with a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of exclusively randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to synthesize the best available evidence for managing acute postoperative pain after arthroscopic surgery. Study Design: Position statement. Methods: The Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until August 10, 2022. Keywords included arthroscopy, opioids, analgesia, and pain, and associated variations. We included exclusively RCTs on adult patients to gather the best available evidence for managing acute postoperative pain after arthroscopic surgery. Patient characteristics, pain, and opioid data were extracted, data were analyzed, and trial bias was evaluated. Results: A total of 21 RCTs were identified related to the prescription of opioid-sparing pain medication after arthroscopic surgery. The following recommendations regarding noninvasive, postoperative pain management strategies were made: (1) multimodal oral nonopioid analgesic regimens-including at least 1 of acetaminophen-a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-can significantly reduce opioid consumption with no change in pain scores; (2) cryotherapy is likely to help with pain management, although the evidence on the optimal method of application (continuous-flow vs ice pack application) is unclear; (3) and (4) limited RCT evidence supports the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and relaxation exercises in reducing opioid consumption after arthroscopy; and (5) limited RCT evidence exists against the efficacy of transdermal lidocaine patches in reducing opioid consumption. Conclusion: A range of nonopioid strategies exist that can reduce postarthroscopic procedural opioid consumption with equivalent vocal pain outcomes. Optimal strategies include multimodal analgesia with education and restricted/reduced opioid prescription.

Comparison of major spine navigation platforms based on key performance metrics: a meta-analysis of 16,040 screws.

PURPOSE: The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare available computer-assisted navigation platforms by key performance metrics including pedicle screw placement accuracy, operative time, neurological complications, and blood loss. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using major databases for articles comparing pedicle screw accuracy of computer-assisted navigation to conventional (freehand or fluoroscopy) controls via post-operative computed tomography. Outcome data were extracted and pooled by random-effects model for analysis. RESULTS: All navigation platforms demonstrated significant reduction in risk of breach, with Stryker demonstrating the highest accuracy compared to controls (OR 0.16 95% CI 0.06 to 0.41, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%) followed by Medtronic. There were no significant differences in accuracy or most surgical outcome measures between platforms; however, BrainLab demonstrated significantly faster operative time compared to Medtronic by 30 min (95% CI - 63.27 to - 2.47, P = 0.03, I2 = 74%). Together, there was significantly lower risk of major breach in the navigation group compared to controls (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.27-0.63, P < 0.0001, I2 = 56%). CONCLUSIONS: When comparing between platforms, Stryker demonstrated the highest accuracy, and Brainlab the shortest operative time, both followed by Medtronic. No significant difference was found between platforms regarding neurologic complications or blood loss. Overall, our results demonstrated a 60% reduction in risk of major breach utilizing computer-assisted navigation, coinciding with previous studies, and supporting its validity. This study is the first to directly compare available navigation platforms offering insight for further investigation and aiding in the institutional procurement of platforms. LEVEL 3 EVIDENCE: Meta-analysis of Level 3 studies.

Opioid-Sparing Strategies in Arthroscopic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overprescription is a problem in orthopaedic surgery. Arthroscopic surgery, given its minimally invasive nature, represents an opportunity to minimize opioid prescription and consumption by using effective pain management adjuncts. Thus, the primary question posed in this study was which noninvasive pain management modalities can effectively manage pain and reduce opioid intake after arthroscopic surgery. METHODS: The databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched on August 10, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating noninvasive pain management strategies in arthroscopy patients were evaluated. Eligible studies were selected through a systematic screening process. Meta-analysis was performed for pain scores and opioid consumption at time points which had sufficient data available. RESULTS: Twenty-one RCTs were included, with a total of 2,148 patients undergoing shoulder, knee, and hip arthroscopy. Meta-analysis comparing nonopioid, oral analgesic regimens, with or without patient education components, with the standard of care or placebo demonstrated no difference in pain scores at 24 hours, 4 to 7 days, or 14 days postoperatively. Nonopioid regimens also resulted in significantly lower opioid consumption in the first 24 hours postoperatively (mean difference, -37.02 mg oral morphine equivalents, 95% confidence interval, -74.01 to -0.03). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), cryotherapy, and zolpidem were also found to effectively manage pain and reduce opioid use in a limited number of studies. CONCLUSIONS: A range of noninvasive pain management strategies exist to manage pain and reduce opioid use after arthroscopic procedures. The strongest evidence base supports the use of multimodal nonopioid oral analgesics, with some studies incorporating patient education components. Some evidence supports the efficacy of TENS, cryotherapy, and nonbenzodiazepine sleeping aids. Direction from governing bodies is an important next step to incorporate these adjuncts into routine clinical practice to manage pain and reduce the amount of opioids prescribed and consumed after arthroscopic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of the 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.

The Impact of Industry Funding on Randomized Controlled Trials of Biologic Therapies.

Background: There has been substantial interest from the pharmaceutical industry to study and develop new biologic agents. Previous studies outside of the biologics field have demonstrated that industry funding has the potential to impact the design and findings of clinical trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of industry funding on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of biologic therapies. Methods: A review of all RCTs involving biologic therapies in top impact factor medical journals from January 2018 to December 2020 was performed. The relationship between industry funding and the presence of statistically significant primary outcomes and the use of active comparators were analyzed. Results: Among the 157 RCTs included, 120 (76%) were industry funded and 37 (24%) declared no industry funding. Industry-funded studies were significantly more likely to report a statistically significant positive primary outcome compared to studies without industry funding (85% vs. 67%, χ2 = 5.867, p = 0.015) and were significantly more likely to utilize placebo or no comparator than non-industry-funded trials (78% vs. 49%, χ2 = 4.430, p = 0.035). Conclusions: Industry-funded trials investigating biologic therapies are more likely to yield statistically significant positive outcomes and use placebo comparators when compared to non-industry-funded biologic therapy trials in high-impact medical journals.

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.

Quantifying the Level of Evidence of Podium Presentations at the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons From 2015 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: The American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) Annual Scientific Meeting is a leading forum for the presentation and dissemination of research regarding the management of hip and knee pathology making research presented at these meetings a representation of the current literature in the field. The purpose of this study was to quantify the level of evidence of podium presentations presented at the AAHKS annual meeting from 2015 to 2019. METHODS: Two reviewers evaluated the abstracts for the available presentations. Basic science and biomechanical studies were excluded from the review. Economic studies that were not able to be evaluated based on the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeon guidelines were also excluded. The two reviewers then independently evaluated each abstract and assigned a level of evidence (level I-V) based on the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeon classification scheme. RESULTS: A total of 258 podium presentations were included. In total, 17 (7%) abstracts were graded level I evidence, 57 (22%) were graded level II, 85 (33%) were graded level III, and 98 (38%) were graded level IV (Table 1). There was a significant change in the distribution of the level of evidence of podium presentations over time (χ2 = 24.6, P = .02). The proportion of level I studies has increased between 2015 and 2019 (from 3.9% to 11.8%) with a concomitant decrease in level IV studies (from 42.3% to 21.6%) over that time period. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a significant improvement in the levels of evidence of podium presentations at the AAHKS Annual Meeting from 2015 to 2019.

The Fragility of Statistically Significant Findings From Randomized Controlled Trials in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The Fragility Index (FI) is a method for evaluating the robustness of statistically significant findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) beyond the P value in trials with dichotomous outcomes. The FI is defined as the number of patients in one arm of a trial that would have to have a different outcome to change the results of the trial from statistically significant to nonsignificant. This review assessed the FI in arthroplasty RCTs. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science for RCTs related to primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) from 2010 to 2020. Trials with a statistically significant dichotomous primary outcome were included. The FI was calculated using Fisher's exact test to determine how many events would need to be reversed to change a study from statistically significant to nonsignificant. RESULTS: A total of 34 RCTs were included. The median sample size was 103 patients (range 24-791). The median FI was 1 (range 0-45), meaning that reversing the outcome of just one patient in either treatment group of each trial would change it from a significant to a nonsignificant result. CONCLUSION: Hip and knee arthroplasty RCTs with statistically significant dichotomous outcomes in TJA are fragile. The median FI in TJA is lower than the FI in any of the other previously reported orthopedic subspecialties. Fragility is another reason to be cautious when conducting or interpreting small trials, and to continue to strive toward large trials to answer important questions in TJA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Perioperative nonopioid analgesia reduces postoperative opioid consumption in knee arthroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The opioid epidemic has prompted an emphasis on investigating opioid-sparing alternatives for pain management following knee arthroscopy. This review evaluated the effects of perioperative nonopioid adjunct analgesia on postoperative opioid consumption and pain control in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS. Prospective comparative studies assessing the efficacy of various perioperative nonopioid analgesic strategies in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy were included. Twenty-five studies (n = 2408) were included. RESULTS: Pre-emptive nonopioid pain medications demonstrated a reduction in cumulative postoperative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption by 11.8 mg (95% CI - 18.3, - 5.4, p ≤ 0.0001) and VAS pain scores by 1.5 (95% CI - 2.3, - 0.7, p < 0.001) at 24 h compared to placebo. Postoperative nonopioid pain medications significantly reduced cumulative postoperative OME consumption by 9.7 mg (95% CI - 14.4, - 5.1, p < 0.001) and VAS pain scores by 1.0 (95% CI - 1.354, - 0.633, p < 0.001) at 24 h compared to placebo. Saphenous nerve blocks significantly reduced cumulative postoperative OME consumption by 6.5 mg (95% CI - 10.3, - 2.6, p = 0.01) and VAS pain scores by 0.8 (- 1.4, - 0.3, p = 0.03) at 24 h compared to placebo. Both preoperative patient education and postoperative cryotherapy reduced postoperative opioid consumption. CONCLUSION: Perioperative nonopioid pharmacotherapy, saphenous nerve blocks, and cryotherapy for patients undergoing knee arthroscopy significantly reduce opioid consumption and pain scores when compared to placebo at 24 h postoperatively. These interventions should be considered in efforts to reduce opioid consumption in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. More research is needed to determine which interventions can reduce pain outside of the immediate postoperative period and the potential synergistic effects of combining interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Cannabinoids in the Management of Acute Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Objective: To synthesize the best evidence surrounding the efficacy of cannabinoids for acute pain in the clinical setting based on subjective pain scores and observed adverse effects. Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Databases, and Google Scholar. Eligibility Criteria: English-language randomized-controlled clinical trials comparing cannabinoids with placebo in patients with acute pain. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. All stages were conducted independently by a team of three reviewers. Data were pooled through meta-analysis and stratified by route of administration. Primary Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported pain and adverse events (AEs). Results: Six trials (678 participants) were included examining oral (5 trials) and intramuscular (1 trial) cannabinoids. Overall, there was a small but statistically significant treatment effect favoring the use of cannabinoids over placebo (-0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.69 to -0.1, i 2=65%, p=0.03). When stratified by route of administration, intramuscular cannabinoids were found to have a significant reduction in pain relative to placebo (-2.98, 95% CI -4.09 to -1.87, i 2=0%, p<0.0001). No difference in effect was observed between oral cannabinoids and placebo (-0.21, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.22, i 2=3%, p=0.34). Serious AEs were rare, and similar across the cannabinoid (14/374, 3.7%) and placebo groups (8/304, 2.6%). Conclusions: There is low-quality evidence indicating that cannabinoids may be a safe alternative for a small but significant reduction in subjective pain score when treating acute pain, with intramuscular administration resulting in a greater reduction relative to oral. Higher quality, long-term randomized-controlled trials examining whether there may be a role for cannabinoids in treating acute pain are required.

Management of infected extremity endoprostheses: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Endoprosthetic reconstructions have become increasingly common in the setting of significant bone loss. Indications include revision arthroplasty, trauma, and reconstruction in the setting of primary malignancies or bony metastases. Although the use of endoprostheses has several advantages, they carry a high risk of infection. The purpose of this review is to determine the success rates of surgical management of infected endoprostheses. METHODS: The authors searched databases for relevant studies and screened in duplicate. Data extracted included overall infection rate, timing of infection, follow-up, isolated pathogen and operative treatment strategy, and subsequent failure rate. The overall quality of the evidence with the Methodological Index for non-randomized studies criteria. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies and 647 patients met the inclusion criteria. 400 patients had operative management and reported outcomes. Failure rates of patients undergoing debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) were 55.1%. Failure rates of patients who underwent one-stage revision were 45.5%. Failure rates of patients undergoing two-stage revision were 27.3%. Failure occurred at 31.4 months (range, 0-228) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of periprosthetic joint infection remain high in endoprosthetic reconstructions. Although DAIR procedures were found to have a low success rate, they remain a reasonable option in acute infections given the morbidity of staged revisions. There is a lack of comparative data in the current literature and the heterogeneity and low level of evidence does not allow for between group comparisons of results.

Maximizing virtual meetings and conferences: a review of best practices.

PURPOSE: In the current COVID-19 pandemic, it is more important than ever to maximize communication in the scientific and medical community. In the context of academic meetings and conferences, there is the growing need for a set of guidelines secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the growing environmental and economic challenges that large academic and medical conferences face. These Virtual Meetings Best Practices were established in response to the scant evidence and guidance on the topic. METHODS: These best practice guidelines were developed from a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature, grey literature and lay literature. MEDLINE and Embase databases were scoped for relevant, non-duplicate articles. For lay articles, Google searches were utilized. The recommendations that comprise this document are a compilation of nonexperimental descriptive studies (e.g. case studies) and expert committee reports, opinions and/or experience of respected authorities, and lay articles. RESULTS: We identified four phases of the meeting cycle: Pre-planning considerations, Planning, Accomplishing conference goals through execution, gauging Response and Engaging the target audience for future cycles (PrePARE). Akin to the Plan, Do, Study, Act Cycle of quality improvement interventions, this document is meant to drive meaningful initial and subsequent interventions in the meetings of the medical and academic community. This covers actions and preparation for registration, scheduling, speakers, attendees, event type, technology, monetization/marketing, dealing with disruptions, post-event deliverables, response and engagement strategies. Enhanced access to integrated, high-quality and efficient virtual meetings will establish a new norm as an effective alternative for innovative health research, education and information dissemination in orthopaedics and beyond. CONCLUSIONS: Given the uncertainty of whether large in-person gatherings will be permitted, advisable or responsible later into the summer of 2020 and beyond, these guidelines will aid events being converted and scheduled as virtual-only meetings. As we move forward in the era of increased utility and utilization of virtual conferencing, these guidelines will serve as a benchmark and standard for surgeons in the field.

Trials and tribulations: so many potential treatments, so few answers.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to quantify the landscape of current clinical trials ongoing for therapies in the treatment of COVID-19. A secondary purpose is to examine the relationship between public and scientific interests in potential therapies for COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic search of clinicaltrials.gov was undertaken on April 22, 2020, to identify all currently registered clinical trials investigating potential therapies for patients with COVID-19. Public interest in the various therapies was quantified utilizing Google Trends. Public interest in hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine was plotted against the cumulative number of active clinical trials evaluating antimalarials as potential COVID-19 therapies over time. RESULTS: There were 341 interventional studies and 208 different therapies actively registered on clinicaltrials.gov whose primary aim is the treatment of COVID-19. The median sample size was 120 patients (range 4-6000) with 154 (45%) trials reporting a planned sample size of 100 patients or less. There was a strong positive correlation (r = 0.76, p = 0.01) between the number of registered clinical trials and the public interest in the top ten proposed therapies. Following the spike in public interest, the average number of new trials increased tenfold with respect to antimalarial therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The relatively small sample sizes and the number of independent trials investigating similar therapies are concerning. Resources may not be being allocated based on scientific merit and may be driven by public consciousness and speculation. Moving forward, a concerted effort focused on implementing large, well-coordinated and carefully designed multi-armed clinical trials will help to ensure that the most promising therapeutic options are rigorously studied and clinically meaningful results produced.