Postoperative pain as a risk factor for stiff knee following total knee arthroplasty and excellent patientreported outcomes after manipulation under anesthesia.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is the first-choice treatment for stiffness following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) unresponsive to pain management and physiotherapy. Some of the predisposing factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following MUA remain poorly studied. We retrospectively investigated the etiological risk factors and the outcomes of MUA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 391 TKA patients from a randomized trial comparing the use of a tourniquet and anesthesia (spinal or general) were analyzed, and patients needing MUA were identified (MUA group). We evaluated in-hospital opioid consumption, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), range of motion (ROM), and pain assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory-short form with a 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: 39 (10%) MUA patients were identified. The MUA patients were younger (60 years vs. 64 years, difference -4, 95% CI -6 to -1) and had higher postoperative oxycodone consumption (66 mg vs. 51 mg, median difference 11, CI 1-22) than the no-MUA patients. The proportion of MUA patients who contacted the emergency department within 3 months because of pain was larger than that of non-MUA patients (41% vs. 12%, OR 5, CI 3-10). At the 1-year follow-up, the ROM was improved by 39° following MUA, but the total ROM was worse in the MUA group (115° vs. 124°, p < 0.001). No difference was found in the OKS between the MUA and no-MUA patients. INTERPRETATION: Higher postoperative pain seems to predict MUA risk. MUA performed 3 months postoperatively offers substantial ROM improvement and comparable PROMs to no-MUA patients 1 year after TKA.

Anesthesia Method, Tourniquet Use, and Persistent Postsurgical Pain after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Persistent postsurgical pain after total knee arthroplasty is a common problem and a major reason for patient dissatisfaction. This secondary analysis aimed to investigate the effects of anesthesia (spinal vs. general) and tourniquet use on persistent pain after total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a previously presented parallel, single-center, randomized trial, 404 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty were randomized to spinal versus general anesthesia and no-tourniquet versus tourniquet groups. Patients assessed pain using the Brief Pain Inventory-short form preoperatively and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The prespecified main outcome was the change in "average pain" measured with numerical 0 to 10 rating scale 1 yr postoperatively. The threshold for clinical importance between groups was set to 1.0. RESULTS: The change in average pain scores 1 yr postoperatively did not differ between the spinal and general anesthesia groups (-2.6 [SD 2.5] vs. -2.3 [SD 2.5], respectively; mean difference, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.9 to 0.1; P = 0.150). The no-tourniquet group reported a smaller decrease in the average pain scores than the tourniquet group (-2.1 [SD 2.7] vs. -2.8 [SD 2.3]; mean difference, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.1; P = 0.012). After 1 yr, the scores concerning the mean of four pain severity variables (numerical rating scale) decreased more in the spinal than in the general anesthesia group (-2.3 [SD 2.2] vs. -1.8 [SD 2.1]; mean difference, -0.5; 95% CI, -0.9 to -0.05; P = 0.029) and less in the no-tourniquet than in the tourniquet group (-1.7 [SD 2.3] vs. -2.3 [SD 2.0]; mean difference, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2 to 1.0; P = 0.005). None of the differences in pain scores reached the threshold for clinical importance. CONCLUSIONS: The type of anesthesia (spinal vs. general) or tourniquet use has no clinically important effect on persistent postsurgical pain after total knee arthroplasty.

Infection safety of dexamethasone in total hip and total knee arthroplasty: a study of eighteen thousand, eight hundred and seventy two operations.

PURPOSE: Dexamethasone has been shown to prevent post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and seems to reduce post-operative pain. Both factors, which can extend the hospital stay, delay rehabilitation, and impact patient satisfaction. Because of the immunosuppressive and glucose-rising effects of dexamethasone, there has been concern of its safety in arthroplasty surgery. The purpose of our study was to examine infection safety of dexamethasone in arthroplasty surgery with enough large study material to reliably detect a possible, even small, difference in infection incidence. METHODS: A total of 18,872 consecutive primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasties were analyzed with data gathered from clinical information databases and a surgical site infection surveillance database with prospective data collection. Also, emergency operations due to fractures were included except for hip hemiarthroplasties. RESULTS: During the follow-up, 189 (1.0%) prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) occurred: 0.8% after primary arthroplasty and 1.9% after revision arthroplasty. Dexamethasone was used in 2922 (15.5%) operations. The PJI rate in the dexamethasone group was 1.1% (31/2922) and in the non-dexamethasone group 1.0% (161/15950), with no significant difference in the risk of PJI between the two groups (OR 1.052, 95% CI 0.715-1.548, P = 0.773). CONCLUSIONS: In our study material, the use of a single 5-10 mg dose of dexamethasone did not increase the incidence of post-operative PJI. A low dose of dexamethasone may be safely used to prevent PONV and as part of multimodal analgesia on patients undergoing arthroplasty operation.