Trends in Race and Sex Representation Among Entering Orthopaedic Surgery Residents: A Continued Call for Active Diversification Efforts.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple studies have analyzed the diversity of surgical subspecialties, in which orthopaedic surgery consistently lags behind in female and minority representation. This study aims to examine contemporary data on trends in sex and racial representation among entering orthopaedic surgery residents. METHODS: The American Association of Medical Colleges' Graduate Medical Education Track data set was queried for all individuals entering surgical residencies in the United States from 2001 to 2020. Deidentified data on self-reported sex and race (American Indian or Alaska Native [AIAN]; Asian; Black or African American, Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish Origin; Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander [NHOPI]; White; and Other) for individuals across all surgical subspecialties were collected. Sex and race proportions for newly matriculating surgical residents were analyzed and aggregated across the study period. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2020, there was a 9.2% increase in the proportion of new female orthopaedic surgery residents, with approximately one in five identifying as such in 2020. By contrast, surgical specialties in aggregate saw a 16.3% increase. A 11.7% decrease was observed in entering orthopaedic residents who identified as White with a corresponding increase in representation by multiracial (9.2%) individuals and those identifying as "Other" (1.9%). The proportion of Asian (range: 10.4 to 15.4%), Black (2.5 to 6.2%), Hispanic (0.3 to 4.4%), AIAN (0.0 to 1.2%), and NHOPI (0.0 to 0.5%) new trainees has largely remained unchanged throughout the study period. A similar trend was observed among surgical specialties in aggregate. Of the identities most represented by the multiracial cohort, the most common were Asian (range: 7.0 to 50.0%), Hispanic (0.0 to 53.5%), and White (30.2 to 50.0%). CONCLUSION: Although orthopaedic surgery has improved in sex diversity in its entering class of residents, measures to increase racial diversity have been less successful. Efforts at improving the recruitment of a diverse class of trainees are necessary and will require acknowledging the importance of both racial and sex representation diversity metrics.

Computer-Navigated and Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: Increasing in Popularity Without Increasing Complications.

BACKGROUND: Data on the clinical impact of computer navigation (CN) and robotic assistance (RA) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are mixed. This study aims to describe modern utilization trends in CN-TKA, RA-TKA, and traditionally-instrumented (TD) TKA and to assess for differences in postoperative complications and opioid consumption by procedure type. METHODS: A national database was queried to identify primary, elective TKA patients from 2015 to 2020. Trends in procedural utilization rates were assessed. Differences in 90-day postoperative complications and inpatient opioid consumption were assessed. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to account for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of the 847,496 patients included, 49,317 (5.82%) and 24,460 (2.89%) underwent CN-TKA and RA-TKA, respectively. CN-TKA utilization increased from 5.64% (2015) to 6.41% (2020) and RA-TKA utilization increased from 0.84% (2015) to 5.89% (2020). After adjusting for confounders, CN-TKA was associated with lower periprosthetic joint infection (P = .001), pulmonary embolism (P < .001), and acute respiratory failure (P = .015) risk compared to traditional (TD) TKA. RA-TKA was associated with lower deep vein thrombosis (P < .001), myocardial infarction (P = .013), and pulmonary embolism (P = .001) risk than TD-TKA. Lower postoperative day 1 opioid usage was seen with CN-TKA and RA-TKA than TD-TKA (P < .001). Lower postoperative day 0 opioid consumption was also seen in RA-TKA (P < .001). CONCLUSION: From 2015 to 2020, there was a relative 13.7% and 601.2% increase in CN-TKAs and RA-TKAs, respectively. This trend was associated with reductions in hospitalization duration, postoperative complications, and opioid consumption. These data support the safety of RA-TKA and CN-TKA compared to TD-TKA. Further investigation into the specific indications for these technology-assisted TKAs is warranted.

Clinical Efficacy of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Versus Stromal Vascular Fraction Injection in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Knee injection using either bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) or stromal vascular fraction (SVF) from adipose tissue has been shown to result in symptomatic improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). It is still unclear whether one of these therapies is superior over the other. PURPOSE: To systematically report the clinical studies evaluating BMAC and SVF in the treatment of knee OA and to compare the clinical efficacy of these 2 injection therapies. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed per the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Studies were included if they reported the clinical outcomes after a single BMAC or SVF injection in the knee joint of patients with OA. Studies evaluating preparations of culture-expanded stem cells were excluded. A random effects model was used; the clinical efficacy of BMAC or SVF injection was assessed using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and compared. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) knee index were the primary outcomes. The level of statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: Ten studies and 472 patients with knee OA who received either BMAC (233 patients) or SVF (239 patients) were included. Patients who received an injection had improved VAS outcomes (mean ± SD): from 5.8 ± 1.3 to 2.6 ± 17 for BMAC and from 6.4 ± 1.4 to 3.4 ± 0.5 for SVF. They also experienced significantly reduced pain (SMD [VAS], 2.6 for BMAC and 3.4 for SVF) and improved function (SMD [WOMAC], 1.4 for BMAC and 1.2 for SVF). However, the SVF injection had a significantly greater effect on pain reduction than did the BMAC injection (P < .0001). Based on WOMAC, the clinical effect of BMAC versus SVF knee injection in patients with knee OA was equivalent (P = .626). Results were limited by the presence of publication bias as well as variability in the preparation methods utilized in the BMAC and SVF injection protocols. Complications were reported in 50% of the BMAC studies (knee stiffness, persistent knee swelling) and 67% of the SVF studies (knee swelling, knee pain, positive SVF cultures without symptoms of infection, and bleeding at the abdominal harvest site). CONCLUSION: A single BMAC or SVF injection into the knee joint of patients with OA resulted in symptomatic improvement at short-term follow-up. However, SVF seemed to be more effective than did BMAC in the reduction of knee pain. There was significant variation in the BMAC and SVF injection preparation techniques used across the studies and a lack of stratification of outcomes based on the radiologic classification of OA. Therefore, these results should be taken with caution.