Corticosteroid Injections within 2 weeks Following Knee Arthroscopy is Associated with Increased Infection Risk.

PURPOSE: We quantified the risk of 90-day postoperative infection following arthroscopy, stratified by specific time intervals of corticosteroid injection (CSI) postoperatively (0-2 weeks, 2-4 weeks, 4-6 weeks, and 6-8 weeks). METHODS: A national, all-payer database was queried. In the primary and secondary analyses, the main outcome was infection at 90-days. Infection was defined by documentation of a septic knee or surgical-site infection according to International Classification of Disease (ICD) Ninth Revision (9) and Tenth Revision (10) codes, and Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes. RESULTS: In the multivariable regression, the odds ratio (OR) of postoperative infection at 90-days was greater in the CSI injections within 0-<2 weeks (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.85-5.92, P<0.001) and 2-<4 weeks (OR 2.72 95% CI 1.57-4.71, P=0.003) cohorts in comparison to the control group. When comparing CSI administered within 0-2 weeks to CSI administered within 2-4 weeks, there was a greater odds of postoperative infection (OR 2.50) at 90-days following arthroscopy. CONCLUSION: CSI given within 2 weeks following knee arthroscopy increases the risk of postoperative infection the greatest whereas CSI given with 4 weeks increases the risk but to a lesser degree.

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline Summary Management of Osteoarthritis of the Hip.

The Management of Osteoarthritis (OA) of the Hip Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline is based on a systematic review of published studies examining the treatment of OA of the hip in adults (aged 18 years and older). Based on the best current available evidence, this guideline contains eight recommendations and nine options to assist orthopaedic surgeons and all qualified physicians managing patients who have been diagnosed by a trained healthcare provider with OA of the hip and are currently undergoing treatment. It is also intended to serve as an information resource for professional healthcare practitioners and developers of practice guidelines and recommendations. In addition to providing pragmatic practice recommendations, this guideline also highlights gaps in the literature and informs areas for future research and quality measure development.

How-To Create an Orthopaedic Systematic Review: A Step-by-step Guide Part II: Study Execution.

Systematic reviews are the apex of the evidence-based pyramid, representing the strongest form of evidence synthesizing results from multiple primary studies. In particular, a quantitative systematic review, or meta-analysis, pools results from multiple studies to help answer a respective research question. The aim of this review is to serve as a guide on how to: (1) design, (2) execute, and (3) publish an orthopaedic arthroplasty systematic review. In Part II, we focus on methods to assess data quality through the Cochrane Risk of Bias, Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies criteria, or Newcastle-Ottawa scale; enumerate various methods for appropriate data interpretation and analysis; and summarize how to convert respective findings to a publishable manuscript (providing a previously published example). Use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines is recommended and standard in all scientific literature, including that of orthopedic surgery. Pooled analyses with forest plots and associated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals are common ways to present data. When converting to a manuscript, it is important to consider and discuss the inherent limitations of systematic reviews, including their inclusion and/or exclusion criteria and overall quality, which can be limited based on the quality of individual studies (eg, publication bias, heterogeneity, search/selection bias). We hope our papers will serve as starting points for those interested in performing an orthopaedic arthroplasty systematic review.

Projected volume of primary total joint arthroplasty in the USA from 2019 to 2060.

INTRODUCTION: The global incidence of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has consistently risen over time, and while various forecasts differ in magnitude, future projections suggest a continued increase in these procedures. Differences in future United States projections may arise from the modeling method selected, the nature of the national arthroplasty registry employed, or the representativeness of the specific hospital discharge records utilized. In addition, many models have not accounted for ambulatory surgery as well as all payer types. Therefore, to attempt to make a more accurate model, we utilized a national representative sample that included outpatient arthroplasties and all insurance types to predict the volumes of primary TJA in the USA from 2019 to 2060. METHODS: A national, all-payer database was queried. All patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, were identified using international classification of disease Ninth Revision (9) and Tenth Revision (10) codes and current procedure terminology codes. Absolute frequencies and incidence rates were calculated per 100,000 for both THA and TKA procedures, with 95% confidence intervals. Mean growth in absolute frequency and incidence rates were calculated for each procedure from 2010 to 2014, and 2010 to 2019, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The overall increase in THA and TKA procedures are expected to grow + 10 and + 36%, respectively, using linear regressions and + 9 and + 37%, respectively. The most positive mean growth in procedure frequency occurred from 2010 to 2014 for THA (+ 24, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): + 21, + 27) and 2010-2019 for TKA (+ 11%, 95% CI: + 9, + 14). There positive trend patterns in incidence rate growth for both procedures, with similar 2010-2019 incidence rates + 6%) for THA (+ 3%, 95% CI: + 0, + 6%) and TKA (+ 3%, 95% CI: + 1%, + 6%). CONCLUSION: Utilizing a nationally representative database, we demonstrated that TJA procedures would continue with an increased growth pattern to 2060, though slightly decreased from the surge from 2014 to 2019. While this finding applies to the representativeness of the population at hand, the inclusion of outpatient arthroplasty and all payer types validates an approach that has not been undertaken in previous projection studies.

The use of preoperative continuous positive airway pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea following total knee arthroplasty: a propensity score matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with sleep apnea, affecting up to 1 in 4 older men in the United States, may be at increased risk of postoperative complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), including increased thromboembolic and cerebrovascular events, as well as respiratory, cardiac, and digestive complications. However, the extent to which the use of CPAP in patients with sleep apnea has been studied in TKA is limited. METHODS: A national, all-payer database was queried to identify all patients who underwent a primary TKA between 2010 and 2021. Patients who had any history of sleep apnea were identified and then stratified based on the use of CPAP. A propensity score match analysis was conducted to limit the influence of confounders. Medical complications, such as cardiac arrest, stroke, pulmonary embolism, transfusion, venous thromboembolism, and wound complications, were collected at 90-days, 1-year, and 2-years. RESULTS: The bivariate analysis showed inferior outcomes for sleep apnea with CPAP use compared to sleep apnea with no CPAP use, in terms of length of stay (5.9 vs. 5.2, p < 0.001), PJI (1.31% vs. 1.14%, p < 0.001), stroke (0.97% vs. 0.82%, p < 0.001), VTE (1.04% vs. 0.82, p < 0.001), and all other complications at 90-days (p < 0.001) except cardiac arrest (0.14% vs. 0.11%, p = 0.052), and aseptic revision (0.40% vs. 0.39%, p = 0.832), PJI (1.81% vs. 1.55%, p < 0.001) and aseptic revision (1.25% vs. 1.06%, p < 0.001) at 1-year, and PJI (2.07 vs. 1.77, p < 0.001) and aseptic revision (1.98 vs. 1.17, p < 0.001) at 2-years. CONCLUSION: Patients with sleep apnea have increased postoperative complications after undergoing TKA in comparison to patients without sleep apnea. More severe sleep apnea, represented by CPAP usage in this study led to worse postoperative outcomes but further analysis is required signify the role of CPAP in this patient population. Patients with sleep apnea should be treated as a high-risk group.

The effect of fixation type on periprosthetic fractures in high-risk patients who have osteoporosis undergoing total joint arthroplasty.

Introduction: Minimizing the burden of periprosthetic fractures (PFF) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) with regard to morbidity and mortality remains an outcome of interest. Patient and surgical risk factors, including osteoporosis and fixation type, have not truly been optimized in patients undergoing TJA as a means to reduce the risk of PFF. As such, we examined: (1) What percentage of patients who underwent THA and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) met the criteria for osteoporosis screening? (2) How did the 5-year rate of PFF and fragility fracture differ in the high-risk and low-risk groups for osteoporosis between the cemented and cementless cohorts? (3) What percentage of the aforementioned patients received a dual x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan before THA or TKA? Methods: We queried an all-payer, national database from April 1, 2016 to December 31, 2021, to identify high-risk and low-risk patients who underwent TJA with a cementless or cemented fixation. High-risk patients met at least one of the following criteria: men at least 70 years old, women at least 65 years old, or patients at least 60 years old who have the following: tobacco use, alcohol abuse, body mass index <18.5, prior fragility fracture, chronic systemic corticosteroids, or genetic condition affecting sex hormones or bone mineral density. Exclusion criteria were a diagnosis of malignancy, high-energy events (motor vehicle collision), those who underwent TJA indicated for fracture, patients less than 50 years old, those who had a prior diagnosis of or treatment for osteoporosis, and a minimum follow-up of less than 2 years. Results: There were 384,783 patients (67.1 %) who underwent cementless TKA and 67,774 patients (11.8 %) who underwent cementless TKA who were considered high risk. Additionally, there were 62,505 patients (10.9 %) who underwent cemented THA and 58,667 patients (10.2 %) who underwent cementless THA and were considered high risk. The cementless cohort had a 5-year periprosthetic fracture risk following TKA of 7.8 % (95 % CI, 5.56 to 10.98) in comparison to 4.30 % in the cemented cohort (85 % CI, 3.98 to 4.65), P < 0.0001. The high-risk cementless cohort had a 5-year periprosthetic fracture risk following THA of 7.9 % (95 % confidence interval (CI), 6.87 to 9.19) in comparison to 7.78 % in the cemented cohort (85 % CI, 6.77 to 8.94), P < 0.0001. Conclusion: There is an increased risk of PFF at 5 years following TKA in patients at high risk for osteoporosis undergoing cementless fixation in comparison to cemented fixation. There is an increased risk of PFF at 5 years following THA in patients at high risk for osteoporosis for both cementless fixation and cemented fixation, but no clinically meaningful difference between the two groups. Addressing the shortcomings of the underutilization of bone density scans and better selecting appropriate patients for TJA based on bone quality and fracture risk can help expedite the process of improving the current state of practice.

Assessing social disparities in inpatient vs. outpatient arthroplasty: a in-state database analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Given the growing emphasis on patient outcomes, including postoperative complications, in total joint arthroplasty (TJA), investigating the rise of outpatient arthroplasty is warranted. Concerns exist over the safety of discharging patients home on the same day due to increased readmission and complication rates. However, psychological benefits and lower costs provide an incentive for outpatient arthroplasty. The influence of social determinants of health disparities on outpatient arthroplasty remains unexplored. One metric that assesses social disparities, including the following individual components: socioeconomic status, household composition, minority status, and housing and transportation, is the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). As such, we aimed to compare: (1) mean overall SVI and mean SVI for each component and (2) risk factors for total complications between patients undergoing inpatient and outpatient arthroplasty. METHODS: Patients who underwent TJA between January 1, 2022 and December 31, 2022 were identified. Data were drawn from the Maryland State Inpatient Database (SID). A total of 7817 patients had TJA within this time period. Patients were divided into inpatient arthroplasty (n = 1429) and outpatient arthroplasty (n = 6338). The mean SVI was compared between inpatient and outpatient procedures for each themed score. The SVI identifies communities that may need support cause by external stresses on human health based on four themed scores: socioeconomic status; household composition and disability; minority status and language; and housing and transportation. The SVI uses the United States Census data to rank census tracts for each individual theme, as well as an overall social vulnerability score. The higher the SVI, the more social vulnerability, or resources needed to thrive in that area. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors for total complications following TJA after controlling for risk factors and patient comorbidities. Total complications included: infection, aseptic loosening, dislocation, arthrofibrosis, mechanical complication, pain, and periprosthetic fracture. RESULTS: Patients who had inpatient arthroplasty had higher overall SVI scores (0.45 vs. 0.42, P < 0.001). The SVI scores were higher for patients who had inpatient arthroplasty for socioeconomic status (0.36 vs. 0.32, P < 0.001), minority status and language (0.76 vs. 0.74, P < 0.001), and housing and transportation (0.53 vs. 0.50, P < 0.001) compared to outpatient arthroplasty, respectively. There was no difference between inpatient and outpatient arthroplasty for household composition and disability (0.41 vs. 0.41, P = 0.99). When controlling for comorbidities, inpatient arthroplasty [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.91, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.23-2.95, P = 0.004], hypertension (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.23-3.62, P = 0.007), and housing and transportation (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.17-3.42, P = 0.012) were independent risk factors for total complications. CONCLUSION: Inpatient arthroplasty was associated with increased social disparities across several components of deprivation as well as an independent risk factor total complications following TJA. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to examine the negative repercussions of inpatient arthroplasty through the lens of social disparities and can target specific areas for intervention.

Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantages associated with increased rates of revisions, readmissions, and complications after total joint arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Low socioeconomic status based on neighborhood of residence has been suggested to be associated with poor outcomes after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The area deprivation index (ADI) is a scale that ranks (zero to 100) neighborhoods by increasing socioeconomic disadvantage and accounts for median income, housing type, and family structure. We sought to examine the potential differences between high (national median ADI = 47) and low ADI among TJA recipients at a single institution. Specifically, we assessed: (1) 30-day emergency department visits/readmissions; (2) 90-day and 1-year revisions; as well as (3) medical and surgical complications. METHODS: A consecutive series of primary TJAs from September 21, 2015, through December 29, 2021, at a tertiary healthcare system were reviewed. A total of 3,024 patients who had complete ADI data were included. Patients were divided into groups below the national median ADI of 47 (n = 1,896) and above (n = 1,128). Multivariable regressions to determine independent risk factors accounting for ADI, race, age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification grade, body mass index, diabetes, congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, alcohol abuse, substance abuse, and tobacco use. The primary outcomes of interest include evaluation of the independent association of ADI with total postoperative complications (at 30 days, 90 days, and 1 year) after adjusting for multiple relevant cofactors. RESULTS: After adjusting for multiple relevant cofactors, at 90 days, ADI > 47 (OR, 1.36, 95% CI 1.00-1.83, P = 0.04), men versus women (OR, 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.99, P = 0.039), and CHF (OR, 1.90, 95% CI 1.18-3.06, P = 0.009) were independently associated with increased total complications. The ADI was not associated with increased total complications at 30 days or 1-year (All P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings of higher complications of the ADI > 47 cohort at 90 days, reaffirm the complex relationship between ADI, patient demographics, and additional socioeconomic parameters that may influence postoperative outcomes and complications after TJA. This study utilizing ADI demonstrates potential areas of intervention and further investigation for assessing arthroplasty outcomes.

A Comparison Between Polyethylene Exchange and Full Revision for Arthrofibrosis Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Arthrofibrosis is a debilitating postoperative complication and a major cause of patient dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There is no consensus regarding the optimal treatment for stiffness after TKA. For cases not amenable to manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), one component or full revision are both suitable options. In a value-based healthcare era, maximizing cost-effectiveness with optimized clinical outcomes for patients remains the ultimate goal. As such, we compared (1) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), (2) range of motion (ROM), as well as (3) complication rates, including MUA and lysis of adhesions (LOA), between polyethylene exchange and full component revision for TKA arthrofibrosis. METHODS: Patients were queried from an institutional database who underwent revision TKA for arthrofibrosis between January 1, 2015, and April 31, 2021. There were 33 patients who underwent full revision and 16 patients who underwent polyethylene exchange. Demographics and baseline characteristics between the cohorts were analyzed. Postoperative outcomes included MUA, LOA, and re-revision rates as well as KOOS, JR, and extension and flexion ROM at a mean follow-up of 3.8 years. Baseline comorbidities, including age, body mass index, alcohol use, tobacco use, and diabetes, were comparable between the full revision and polyethylene exchange revision cohorts (P > .05). The one and full component revisions had similar preoperative KOOS, JR (43 versus 42, P = .85), and flexion (81 versus 82 degrees, P = .80) versus extension (11 versus 11 degrees, P = .87) ROM. RESULTS: The full component revision had higher KOOS, JR (65 versus 55, P = .04), and flexion (102 versus 92 degrees, P = .02), but similar extension (3 versus 3 degrees, P = .80) ROM at final follow-up compared to the polyethylene exchange revision, respectively. The MUA (18.2 versus 18.8%, P = .96) and LOA (2.0 versus 0.0%, P = .32) rates were similar between full component and polyethylene exchange revisions. There was one re-revision (3.0%) for the cohort of patients who initially underwent full revision. There were four full re-revisions (25.0%) and two polyethylene exchange re-revisions (12.5%) performed in the cohort of patients who initially underwent a polyethylene exchange revision. CONCLUSIONS: The full component revision for stiffness after TKA showed favorable KOOS, JR, ROM, and outcomes in comparison to the polyethylene exchange revision. While the optimal treatment for stiffness after TKA is without consensus, this study supports the use of the full component revision when applied to the institutional population at hand. It is imperative that homogeneity exists in preoperative definitions, preoperative baseline patient demographics, ROM and function levels, outcome measures, and preoperative indications, as well as the inclusion of clinical data that assesses complete exchange, single exchange, and tibial insert exchange.

Appropriateness of Frequently Asked Patient Questions Following Total Hip Arthroplasty From ChatGPT Compared to Arthroplasty-Trained Nurses.

BACKGROUND: The use of ChatGPT (Generative Pretrained Transformer), which is a natural language artificial intelligence model, has gained unparalleled attention with the accumulation of over 100 million users within months of launching. As such, we aimed to compare the following: 1) orthopaedic surgeons' evaluation of the appropriateness of the answers to the most frequently asked patient questions after total hip arthroplasty; and 2) patients' evaluation of ChatGPT and arthroplasty-trained nurses responses to answer their postoperative questions. METHODS: We prospectively created 60 questions to address the most commonly asked patient questions following total hip arthroplasty. We obtained answers from arthroplasty-trained nurses and from the ChatGPT-3.5 version for each of the questions. Surgeons graded each set of responses based on clinical judgment as 1) "appropriate," 2) "inappropriate" if the response contained inappropriate information, or 3) "unreliable" if the responses provided inconsistent content. Each patient was given a randomly selected question from the 60 aforementioned questions, with responses provided by ChatGPT and arthroplasty-trained nurses, using a Research Electronic Data Capture survey hosted at our local hospital. RESULTS: The 3 fellowship-trained surgeons graded 56 out of 60 (93.3%) responses for the arthroplasty-trained nurses and 57 out of 60 (95.0%) for ChatGPT to be "appropriate." There were 175 out of 252 (69.4%) patients who were more comfortable following the ChatGPT responses and 77 out of 252 (30.6%) who preferred arthroplasty-trained nurses' responses. However, 199 out of 252 patients (79.0%) responded that they were "uncertain" with regard to trusting AI to answer their postoperative questions. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT provided appropriate answers from a physician perspective. Patients were also more comfortable with the ChatGPT responses than those from arthroplasty-trained nurses. Inevitably, its successful implementation is dependent on its ability to provide credible information that is consistent with the goals of the physician and patient alike.

Evaluating ChatGPT's Utility in Medicine Guidelines Through Web Search Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: With the rise of machine learning applications in health care, shifts in medical fields that rely on precise prognostic models and pattern detection tools are anticipated in the near future. Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) is a recent machine learning innovation known for producing text that mimics human conversation. To gauge ChatGPT's capability in addressing patient inquiries, the authors set out to juxtapose it with Google Search, America's predominant search engine. Their comparison focused on: 1) the top questions related to clinical practice guidelines from the American Academy of Family Physicians by category and subject; 2) responses to these prevalent questions; and 3) the top questions that elicited a numerical reply. METHODS: Utilizing a freshly installed Google Chrome browser (version 109.0.5414.119), the authors conducted a Google web search (www.google.com) on March 4, 2023, ensuring minimal influence from personalized search algorithms. Search phrases were derived from the clinical guidelines of the American Academy of Family Physicians. The authors prompted ChatGPT with: "Search Google using the term '(refer to search terms)' and document the top four questions linked to the term." The same 25 search terms were employed. The authors cataloged the primary 4 questions and their answers for each term, resulting in 100 questions and answers. RESULTS: Of the 100 questions, 42% (42 questions) were consistent across all search terms. ChatGPT predominantly sourced from academic (38% vs 15%, p = 0.0002) and government (50% vs 39%, p = 0.12) domains, whereas Google web searches leaned toward commercial sources (32% vs 11%, p = 0.0002). Thirty-nine percent (39 questions) of the questions yielded divergent answers between the 2 platforms. Notably, 16 of the 39 distinct answers from ChatGPT lacked a numerical reply, instead advising a consultation with a medical professional for health guidance. CONCLUSION: Google Search and ChatGPT present varied questions and answers for both broad and specific queries. Both patients and doctors should exercise prudence when considering ChatGPT as a digital health adviser. It's essential for medical professionals to assist patients in accurately communicating their online discoveries and ensuing inquiries for a comprehensive discussion.

The Utility of the Area Deprivation Index in Assessing Complications After Total Joint Arthroplasty.

Background: Vulnerable populations, including patients from a lower socioeconomic status, are at an increased risk for infection, revision surgery, mortality, and complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). An effective metric to quantify and compare these populations has not yet been established in the literature. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) provides a composite area-based indicator of socioeconomic disadvantage consisting of 17 U.S. Census indicators, based on education, employment, housing quality, and poverty. We assessed patient risk factor profiles and performed multivariable regressions of total complications at 30 days, 90 days, and 1 year. Methods: A prospectively collected database of 3,024 patients who underwent primary elective total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty performed by 3 fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons from January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2021, at a tertiary health-care center was analyzed. Patients were divided into quintiles (ADI ≤20 [n = 555], ADI 21 to 40 [n = 1,001], ADI 41 to 60 [n = 694], ADI 61 to 80 [n = 396], and ADI 81 to 100 [n = 378]) and into groups based on the national median ADI, ≤47 (n = 1,896) and >47 (n = 1,128). Results: Higher quintiles had significantly more females (p = 0.002) and higher incidences of diabetes (p < 0.001), congestive heart failure (p < 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p < 0.001), hypertension (p < 0.001), substance abuse (p < 0.001), and tobacco use (p < 0.001). When accounting for several confounding variables, all ADI quintiles were not associated with increased total complications at 30 days, but age (p = 0.023), female sex (p = 0.019), congestive heart failure (p = 0.032), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.001), hypertension (p = 0.003), and chronic kidney disease (p = 0.010) were associated. At 90 days, ADI > 47 (p = 0.040), female sex (p = 0.035), and congestive heart failure (p = 0.001) were associated with increased total complications. Conclusions: Balancing intrinsic factors, such as patient demographic characteristics, and extrinsic factors, such as social determinants of health, may minimize postoperative complications following TJA. The ADI is one tool that can account for several extrinsic factors, and can thus serve as a starting point to improving patient education and management in the setting of TJA. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

How-To Create an Orthopaedic Systematic Review: A Step-by-Step Guide. Part III: Executing a Meta-Analysis.

At the top of the evidence-based pyramid, systematic reviews stand out as the most powerful, synthesizing findings from numerous primary studies. Specifically, a quantitative systematic review, known as a meta-analysis, combines results from various studies to address a specific research question. This review serves as a guide on how to: (1) design; (2) perform; and (3) publish an orthopedic arthroplasty systematic review. In Part III, we focus on how to design and perform a meta-analysis. We delineate the advantages and disadvantages of meta-analyses compared to systematic reviews, acknowledging their potential challenges due to time constraints and the complexities posed by study heterogeneity and data availability. Despite these obstacles, a well-executed meta-analysis contributes precision and heightened statistical power, standing at the apex of the evidence-based pyramid. The design of a meta-analysis closely mirrors that of a systematic review, but necessitates the inclusion of effect sizes, variability measures, sample sizes, outcome measures, and overall study characteristics. Effective data presentation involves the use of forest plots, along with analyses for heterogeneities and subgroups. Widely-used software tools are common in this domain, and there is a growing trend toward incorporating artificial intelligence software. Ultimately, the intention is for these papers to act as foundational resources for individuals interested in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the context of orthopaedic arthroplasty, where applicable.

Cemented is not superior to cementless total knee arthroplasty for complications: a propensity score matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is continued debate regarding the survivorship and revision rate of cementless versus cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) prostheses. This includes the assessment of early revision surgery due to aseptic loosenings and periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Studies have not always taken into account the impact of comorbidities, such as diabetes, obesity, and tobacco. Therefore, we compared revisions in a large population of patients undergoing cemented or cementless TKAs at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years. METHODS: A review of an administrative claims database was used to identify patients undergoing primary TKA, either cementless (n = 8,890) or cemented (n = 215,460), from October 1, 2015 to October 31, 2020. Revision surgery for PJI and aseptic loosening were identified with diagnosis and associated procedural codes at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years and then compared between groups. A propensity matched-analysis was performed for age, sex, Charles Comorbidity Index (CCI) > 3, alcohol abuse, tobacco use, obesity, and diabetes. Chi square tests assessed statistical significance of differences in the matched cohorts using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A P < 0.05 was defined as statistically significant. RESULTS: Cementless TKA was associated with similar revisions rates due to PJIs at 90 days (OR, 1.04, 95% CI 0.79-1.38, p = 0.83), 1 year (OR, 0.93, 95% CI 0.75-1.14, p = 0.53, and 2 years (OR, 0.87, 95% CI 0.73-1.05, p = 0.17) in comparison to the cemented TKA cohort. The odds ratio of revision due to aseptic loosening was similar as well at 90 days (OR, 0.67, 95% CI 0.34-1.31, 0.31), 1 year (OR, 1.09, 95% CI 0.73-1.61, p = 0.76), and 2 years (OR, 1.00, 95% CI 0.73-1.61, p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: This study found a comparable risk of PJI and aseptic loosening in cementless and cemented TKA when controlling for several comorbidities, such as tobacco, diabetes, and alcohol. Therefore, with proper patient selection, cementless TKAs can be performed with expectation of low risks of infections and aseptic loosenings.

How-To Create an Orthopaedic Systematic Review: A Step-by-Step Guide Part I: Study Design.

Systematic reviews are conducted through a consistent and reproducible method to search, appraise, and summarize information. Within the evidence-based pyramid, systematic reviews can be at the apex when incorporating high-quality studies, presenting the strongest form of evidence given their synthesis of results from multiple primary studies to level IV evidence, depending on the studies they incorporate. When combined and supplemented with a meta-analysis using statistical methods to pool the results of 3 or more studies, systematic reviews are powerful tools to help answer research questions. The aim of this review is to serve as a guide on how to: (1) design; (2) execute; and (3) publish an orthopaedic arthroplasty systematic review and meta-analysis. In Part I, we discuss how to develop an appropriate research question as well as source and screen databases. To date, commonly used databases to source studies include PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science. Although not all-encompassing, this paper serves as a starting point for those interested in performing and/or critically reviewing lower extremity arthroplasty systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Use and Application of Large Language Models for Patient Questions Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: A consumer-focused health care model not only allows unprecedented access to information, but equally warrants consideration of the appropriateness of providing accurate patient health information. Nurses play a large role in influencing patient satisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but they come at a cost. A specific natural language artificial intelligence (AI) model, ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer), has accumulated over 100 million users within months of launching. As such, we aimed to compare: (1) orthopaedic surgeons' evaluation of the appropriateness of the answers to the most frequently asked patient questions after TKA; and (2) patients' comfort level in answering their postoperative questions by using answers provided by arthroplasty-trained nurses and ChatGPT. METHODS: We prospectively created 60 questions based on the most commonly asked patient questions following TKA. There were 3 fellowship-trained surgeons who assessed the answers provided by arthroplasty-trained nurses and ChatGPT-4 to each of the questions. The surgeons graded each set of responses based on clinical judgment as: (1) "appropriate," (2) "inappropriate" if the response contained inappropriate information, or (3) "unreliable," if the responses provided inconsistent content. Patients' comfort level and trust in AI were assessed using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) hosted at our local hospital. RESULTS: The surgeons graded 44 out of 60 (73.3%) responses for the arthroplasty-trained nurses and 44 out of 60 (73.3%) for ChatGPT to be "appropriate." There were 4 responses graded "inappropriate" and one response graded "unreliable" provided by the nurses. For the ChatGPT response, there were 5 responses graded "inappropriate" and no responses graded "unreliable." There were 136 patients (53.8%) who were more comfortable with the answers provided by ChatGPT compared to 86 patients (34.0%) who preferred the answers from arthroplasty-trained nurses. Of the 253 patients, 233 (92.1%) were uncertain if they would trust AI to answer their postoperative questions. There were 127 patients (50.2%) who answered that if they knew the previous answer was provided by ChatGPT, their comfort level in trusting the answer would change. CONCLUSIONS: One potential use of ChatGPT can be found in providing appropriate answers to patient questions after TKA. At our institution, cost expenditures can potentially be minimized while maintaining patient satisfaction. Inevitably, successful implementation is dependent on the ability to provide information that is credible and in accordance with the objectives of both physicians and patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Addition of vancomycin to cefazolin is often unnecessary for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis during total joint arthroplasties.

PURPOSE: The gold standard to decrease total joint arthroplasty (TJA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Despite substantial prevention efforts, rates of PJIs are increasing. While cefazolin is the drug of choice for preoperative prophylaxis, adjunctive vancomycin therapy has been used in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) endemic areas. However, studies examining these combinations are lacking. Therefore, we sought to examine complications among vancomycin plus cefazolin and cefazolin-only recipients prior to primary TJA in a single institutional sample and specifically assessed: (1) microbiological aspects, including periprosthetic joint and surgical site infections, microbes cultured from the infection, and frequency of microbes cultured from nasal swab screening; (2) 30-day emergency department (ED) visits and re-admissions; as well as (3) associated risk factors for infection. METHODS: A total of 2,907 patients (1,437 receiving both cefazolin and vancomycin and 1,470 given cefazolin only) who underwent primary TJA between 1 January 2014 and 31 May 2021 were identified. SSI and PJI as well as rates of cultured microbes rates were obtained through one year, those with prior nasal swab screening and 30-day re-admission were identified. Subsequently, multiple regression analyses were performed to investigate potential independent risk factors for PJIs. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rates of SSI (P = 0.089) and PJI (P = 0.279) between the groups at one year after operation. Commonly identified organisms included Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species. The VC cohort did have a greater reduction of MRSA in the previously nasal swab-screened subset of patients. Multiple regression analyses demonstrated emergency as well as inpatient admissions as risk factors for PJI. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive vancomycin therapy offers increased protection against MRSA in previously screened individuals. However, those negative for MRSA screening do not require vancomycin and have similar protection to infection compared to recipients of cefazolin only in a high-powered single institution analysis in an MRSA endemic area.

Antibiotic prophylaxis prior to colonoscopy with biopsy does not decrease risk of prosthetic joint infection in total knee arthroplasty recipients.

Introduction: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) risk continues to receive much attention given its associated morbidity and costs to patients and healthcare systems. It has been hypothesized that invasive colonoscopies may increase the risk of PJI. However, the decision to administer antibiotic prophylaxis lacks clinical guidance. In this study we aimed to compare PJI rates in patients undergoing colonoscopies with and without antibiotic prophylaxis against a control group, analyzing PJI occurrences at 90 days, 6 months, 9 months, and 1-year post-procedure and (2) assess the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on PJI rates to inform clinical guidelines. Methods: We queried a national, all-payer database to identify all primary total knee arthroplasty procedures without prior history of PJI between January 2010 and October 2020 (n = 1.9 million). All patients who had a diagnosis of PJI within one year of index procedure were excluded. There were three cohorts identified: colonoscopy with biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis; colonoscopy with biopsy with antibiotic prophylaxis; and a control of no prior colonoscopy. Both colonoscopy cohorts were slightly younger and had higher comorbidities than the controls. The PJI diagnoses were identified at four separate time intervals within one-year after colonoscopy: 90-days; 6-months; 9-months; and 1-year. Chi-square analyses with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals were conducted for PJI rates between groups at all time-points. Results: Among all cohorts, no significant differences in PJI rates were found at 90-days (P = 0.459), 6-months (P = 0.608), 9-months (P = 0.598), and 1-year (P = 0.330). Similarly, direct comparison of both colonoscopy groups, with and without antibiotic prophylaxis, demonstrated no PJI rate differences at 90-day (P = 0.540), 6-months (P = 0.812), 9-months (P = 0.958), and 1-year (P = 0.207). Ranges of ORs between the colonoscopy cohorts were 1.07-1.43. Conclusion: Invasive colonoscopy does not increase the risk of PJI in patients who have pre-existing knee implants. Furthermore, antibiotic prophylaxis may not be warranted in patients undergoing colonoscopy who have a planned biopsy.