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.

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 Factors for All-Cause Early Reoperation Following Tumor Resection and Endoprosthetic Reconstruction: A Secondary Analysis from the PARITY Trial.

BACKGROUND: Oncologic resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction of lower-extremity musculoskeletal tumors are complex procedures fraught with multiple modes of failure. A robust assessment of factors contributing to early reoperation in this population has not been performed in a large prospective cohort. The aim of the present study was to assess risk factors for early reoperation in patients who underwent tumor excision and endoprosthetic reconstruction, with use of data from the Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial. METHODS: Baseline characteristics were assessed, including age, sex, tumor type, tumor location, presence of a soft-tissue mass, diabetes, smoking status, chemotherapy use, and neutropenia. Operative factors were recorded, including operative time, topical antibiotics, silver-coated prosthetics, endoprosthetic fixation, extra-articular resection, length of bone resected, margins, tranexamic acid, postoperative antibiotics, negative-pressure wound therapy, and length of stay. Univariate analysis was utilized to explore the differences between patients who did and did not undergo reoperation within 1 year postoperatively, and a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model was utilized to explore the predictors of reoperation within 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 155 (25.7%) of 604 patients underwent ≥1 reoperation. In univariate analysis, tumor type (p < 0.001), presence of a soft-tissue mass (p = 0.045), operative time (p < 0.001), use of negative-pressure wound therapy (p = 0.010), and hospital length of stay (p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with reoperation. On multivariate assessment, tumor type (benign aggressive bone tumor versus primary bone malignancy; hazard ratio [HR], 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.63; p = 0.01), operative time (HR per hour, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.23; p < 0.001), and use of negative-pressure wound therapy (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.90; p = 0.002) remained significant predictors of reoperation within 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Independent variables associated with reoperation within 1 year in patients who underwent tumor resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction included tumor type (benign aggressive bone tumor versus primary bone malignancy), operative time, and use of negative-pressure wound therapy. These results will help to inform patients and surgeons regarding the risk of reoperation by diagnosis and reinforce operative time as a factor influencing reoperation. These results also support further investigation into the use of negative-pressure wound therapy at the time of surgery in this patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Opioid Use in Surgical Management in Musculoskeletal Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the context of orthopaedic surgery has been recognized as having a critical role in the ongoing opioid epidemic. Given the negative consequences of chronic opioid use, great efforts have been made to reduce both preoperative and postoperative opioid prescribing and consumption in orthopaedic surgery. Musculoskeletal oncology patients represent a unique subset of patients, and there is a paucity of data evaluating perioperative opioid consumption and the risk for chronic use. The objective of the present study was to describe opioid consumption patterns and evaluate predictors of chronic opioid use in musculoskeletal oncology patients undergoing limb-salvage surgery and endoprosthetic reconstruction. METHODS: The present study was a secondary analysis of the recently completed PARITY (Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery) trial and included musculoskeletal oncology patients undergoing lower-extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction. The primary outcome was the incidence of opioid consumption over the study period. A multivariate binomial logistic regression model was created to explore predictors of chronic opioid consumption at 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Overall, 193 (33.6%) of 575 patients were consuming opioids preoperatively. Postoperatively, the number of patients consuming opioids was 82 (16.7%) of 492 at 3 months, 37 (8%) of 460 patients at 6 months, and 28 (6.6%) of 425 patients at 1 year. Of patients consuming opioids preoperatively, 12 (10.2%) of 118 had continued to consume opioids at 1 year postoperatively. The adjusted regression model found that only surgery for metastatic bone disease was predictive of chronic opioid use (odds ratio, 4.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.54 to 15.40; p = 0.007). Preoperative opioid consumption, older age, sex, longer surgical times, reoperation rates, and country of origin were not predictive of chronic use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high prevalence of preoperative opioid use, an invasive surgical procedure, and a high rate of reoperation, few patients had continued to consume opioids at 1 year postoperatively. The presence of metastases was associated with chronic opioid use. These results are a substantial departure from the existing orthopaedic literature evaluating other patient populations, and they suggest that specific prescribing guidelines are warranted for musculoskeletal oncology patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Impact of Implant Fixation Type on Reoperation Rates Following Endoprosthetic Reconstruction Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Prospective evidence supporting the use of cemented or uncemented implants in endoprosthetic reconstruction is lacking. The present study aimed to determine the effect of cemented fixation compared with uncemented fixation on the rate of all-cause reoperation at 1 year postoperatively. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens In Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial. A total of 503 patients who underwent surgical excision and endoprosthetic reconstruction of a lower-extremity bone tumor were included in this analysis. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to assess the independent relationship between fixation group and implant survivorship, with all-cause reoperation as the end point. RESULTS: There were 388 cemented implants and 115 uncemented implants. Participants had a mean age of 42.7 years (standard deviation, 22.0 years), and 59% were male. Overall, 131 reoperations were identified over the 1-year follow-up period. There were no significant differences found in all-cause reoperation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.57; p = 0.761), septic reoperation, or aseptic reoperation between cemented and uncemented fixation at 1 year postoperatively. The Cox regression analysis demonstrated that total operative time (HR per hour, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.20; p = 0.019) was an independent predictor of reoperation. The risk of reoperation was lower in patients with benign aggressive disease (HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.80; p = 0.029) or metastatic bone disease (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.85; p = 0.023). Patients who underwent cemented fixation showed clinically meaningful functional improvement at 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Cemented compared with uncemented fixation has no effect on 1-year all-cause reoperation rates in endoprosthetic reconstruction surgery. Further research is required to investigate the long-term survival of cemented versus uncemented implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Pediatric and Adult Patients Have Similar Functional Improvement After Endoprosthetic Reconstruction of Lower-Extremity Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Although the treatment of lower-extremity bone tumors is similar between adult and pediatric patients, differences in outcomes are unknown. Outcomes for lower-extremity oncologic reconstruction have been challenging to study because of the low incidence and heterogeneity in disease and patient characteristics. The PARITY (Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery) trial is the largest prospective data set assembled to date for patients with lower-extremity bone tumors and presents an opportunity to investigate differences in outcomes between these groups. METHODS: Patient details were acquired from the prospectively collected PARITY trial database. The 1993 Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS-93) and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) questionnaires were administered preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Continuous outcomes were compared between groups with use of the Student t test, and dichotomous outcomes were compared with use of the Pearson chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 150 pediatric and 447 adult patients were included. Pediatric patients were more likely than adult patients to have a primary bone tumor (146 of 150 compared with 287 of 447, respectively; p < 0.001) and to have received adjuvant chemotherapy (140 of 149 compared with 195 of 441, respectively; p < 0.001). Reoperation rates were not significantly different between age groups (45 of 105 pediatric patients compared with 106 of 341 adult patients; p ≤ 0.13). Pediatric patients had higher mean MSTS-93 scores (64.7 compared with 53.8 among adult patients; p < 0.001) and TESS (73.4 compared with 60.4 among adult patients; p < 0.001) at baseline, which continued to 1 year postoperatively (mean MSTS-93 score, 82.0 compared with 76.8 among adult patients; p = 0.02; mean TESS, 87.7 compared with 78.6 among adult patients; p < 0.001). Despite the differences in outcomes between cohorts, pediatric and adult patients demonstrated similar improvement in MSTS-93 scores (mean difference, 17.4 and 20.0, respectively; p = 0.48) and TESS (mean difference, 14.1 and 14.7, respectively; p = 0.83) from baseline to 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patients had significantly better functional outcomes than adult patients at nearly all of the included postoperative time points; however, pediatric and adult patients showed similar mean improvement in these outcomes at 1 year postoperatively. These findings may be utilized to help guide the postoperative expectations of patients undergoing oncologic reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patient and Surgical Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection in Lower-Extremity Oncological Endoprosthetic Reconstruction: A Secondary Analysis of the PARITY Trial Data.

BACKGROUND: The specific risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI) in orthopaedic oncology patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction have not previously been evaluated in a large prospective cohort. In the current study, we aimed to define patient- and procedure-specific risk factors for SSI in patients who underwent surgical excision and endoprosthetic reconstruction for lower-extremity bone or soft-tissue tumors using the prospectively collected data of the Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial. METHODS: PARITY was a multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled trial with a parallel 2-arm design that aimed to determine the effect of a long duration (5 days) versus short duration (24 hours) of postoperative prophylactic antibiotics on the rate of SSI in patients undergoing surgical excision and endoprosthetic reconstruction of the femur or tibia. In this secondary analysis of the PARITY data, a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model was constructed to explore predictors of SSI within 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 96 (15.9%) of the 604 patients experienced an SSI. Of the 23 variables analyzed in the univariate analysis, 4 variables achieved significance: preoperative diagnosis, operative time, volume of muscle excised, and hospital length of stay (LOS). However, only hospital LOS was found to be independently predictive of SSI in the multivariate regression analysis (hazard ratio per day = 1.03; 95% confidence interval = 1.01 to 1.05; p < 0.001). An omnibus test of model coefficients demonstrated that the model showed significant improvement over the null model (χ2 = 78.04; p < 0.001). No multicollinearity was found. CONCLUSIONS: This secondary analysis of the PARITY study data found that the only independent risk factor for SSI on multivariate analysis was hospital LOS. It may therefore be reasonable for clinicians to consider streamlined discharge plans for orthopaedic oncology patients to potentially reduce the risk of SSI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Central Adjudication Committee and Clinical Site Investigator Agreement on Outcomes in the PARITY Trial: A Secondary Analysis of the PARITY Trial Data.

BACKGROUND: The detection of a surgical site infection (SSI) in patients with metal implants requires a high degree of clinical acumen. The inherent subjectivity of SSI diagnosis poses a challenge in the design of surgical trials because this subjectivity raises concern for outcome assessment bias. Central Adjudication Committees (CACs) are often utilized to minimize the variability in outcome assessment. Little research has been done to determine the reliability of outcome assessment in trials utilizing a CAC. In the present study, we determined the agreement between the study CAC and the clinical site investigators for the primary and secondary outcome assessments. METHODS: The Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial was a multicenter, blinded, parallel 2-arm, randomized controlled trial that aimed to determine the effect of a 5-day versus 1-day postoperative prophylactic antibiotic regimen on the rate of SSI in patients undergoing surgical excision of tumors in the femur or tibia. The blinded PARITY CAC adjudicated all primary and secondary outcomes identified during the 1-year study follow-up. In the present secondary analysis, the Cohen kappa statistic was utilized to determine the level of agreement. RESULTS: The primary outcome of SSI diagnosis demonstrated a substantial level of agreement between the CAC and the site investigators (0.699; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.595 to 0.803]). Categorization of the SSI (i.e., superficial, deep, or organ space) showed moderate agreement (0.470; 95% CI, 0.382 to 0.558). Secondary outcomes such as the types of reoperations and the indication for reoperation typically showed substantial to almost perfect agreement, whereas antibiotic-related complications showed fair agreement (0.241; 95% CI, 0.000 to 0.474). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was a substantial level of agreement between the PARITY CAC and site investigators on the diagnosis of an SSI, as well as typically at least substantial agreement on the causes and types of reoperations, there was less agreement regarding the type of SSI and the occurrence of an antibiotic-related complication. Therefore, the CAC appears to have provided value when adjudicating the depth of infection and when determining the causality of medical complications associated with antibiotics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Marginalization Influences Access, Outcomes, and Discharge Destination Following Total Joint Arthroplasty in Canada's Universal Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: The influence of socioeconomic status on outcomes following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in the Canadian single-payer healthcare system is yet to be elucidated. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the impact of socioeconomic status on TJA outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 7,304 consecutive TJA (4,456 knees and 2,848 hips) performed between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2019. The primary independent variable was the average census marginalization index. The primary dependent variable was functional outcome scores. RESULTS: The most marginalized patients in both the hip and knee cohorts had significantly worse preoperative and postoperative functional scores. Patients in the most marginalized quintile (V) showed a decreased odds of achieving a minimal important difference in functional scores at 1-year follow-up (odds ratio [OR] 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.20, 0.97], P = .043). Patients in the knee cohort in the most marginalized quintiles (IV and V) had increased odds of being discharged to an inpatient facility with an OR of 2.07 (95% CI [1.06, 4.04], P = .033) and OR of 2.57 (95% CI [1.26, 5.22], P = .009), respectively. Patients in the hip cohort in V quintile (most marginalized) had increased odds of being discharged to an inpatient facility with an OR of 2.24 (95% CI [1.02, 4.96], P = .046). CONCLUSION: Despite being a part of the Canadian universal single-payer healthcare system, the most marginalized patients had worse preoperative and postoperative function, and had increased odds of being discharged to another inpatient facility. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Post hip fracture orthogeriatric care-a Canadian position paper addressing challenges in care and strategies to meet quality indicators.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is a major disease state associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Less than half of the individuals sustaining a low energy hip fracture are diagnosed and treated for the underlying osteoporosis. OBJECTIVE: A multidisciplinary Canadian hip fracture working group has developed practical recommendations to meet Canadian quality indicators in post hip fracture care. METHODS: A comprehensive narrative review was conducted to identify and synthesize key articles on post hip fracture orthogeriatric care for each of the individual sections and develop recommendations. These recommendations are based on the best evidence available today. CONCLUSION: Recommendations are anticipated to reduce recurrent fractures, improve mobility and healthcare outcomes post hip fracture, and reduce healthcare costs. Key messages to enhance postoperative care are also provided.

Chondrosarcoma: A Clinical Review.

Chondrosarcomas are a diverse group of malignant cartilaginous matrix-producing neoplasms. Conventional chondrosarcomas are a continuum of disease based on the biologic activity of the tumor. The tumors range from the relatively biologically benign low-grade tumors or intermediate atypical cartilaginous tumors (ACTs), to malignant, aggressive high-grade tumors. The clinical presentation, radiographic and pathologic findings, treatments and outcomes vary significantly based on the histologic grade of the tumor. Chondrosarcomas present a diagnostic dilemma, particularly in the differentiation between high- and intermediate-grade tumors and that of low-grade tumors from benign enchondromas. A multidisciplinary team at a tertiary sarcoma centre allows for optimal care of these patients.

Routine use of antibiotic-laden bone cement in total knee arthroplasty is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer healthcare system.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the perspective of a single-payer healthcare system. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed over a 2-year time horizon comparing primary TKA with either ALBC or regular bone cement (RBC) from the perspective of the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. All costs were in 2020 Canadian dollars. Health utilities were in the form of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Model inputs for cost, utilities and probabilities were derived from the literature as well as regional and national databases. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Primary TKA with ALBC was found to be more cost-effective compared to primary TKA with RBC with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of -3,637.79 CAD/QALY. The use of routine ALBC remained cost-effective even with cost increases of up to 50% per bag of ALBC. TKA with ALBC was no longer cost-effective if the rate of PJI following this practice increased 52%, or the rate of PJI following the use of RBC decreased 27%. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of ALBC in TKA is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. This remains to be the case even with a 50% increase in the cost of ALBC. Policy makers and hospital administrators of single-payer healthcare systems can leverage this model to inform their local funding policies. Future prospective reviews and randomized controlled trials from the perspective of various healthcare models can further shed light on this issue. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Common errors in the design of orthopaedic trials: Has anything changed?

INTRODUCTION: The adoption of evidence-based orthopaedics has shifted the focus from expert base opinions and anecdotal evidence to a focus on integrating the best available clinical research. This shift has led to an increased focus on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the field. Although RCTs are considered the highest level of evidence, methodologic errors can introduce bias and limit the validity of the results. Early trials were hampered by lack of blinding, inadequate sample sizes and other design flaws. The objective of this review was to examine the current literature to determine if the design and execution of RCTs has improved. DESIGN ERRORS: The awareness of the importance of sample size increased over time with substantially more trials reporting sample size calculations. However, many contemporary RCTs are still underpowered and fail to reach their calculated sample size. Given the challenges of surgically based RCTs, the majority of historical trials lacked blinding, increasing the risk of bias. There is evidence that there has been a concerted effort to increase the blinding in RCTs, particularly in outcome assessors. A more recent development in the design of surgical trials is the introduction of expertise-based trial designs in which patients are randomized to a surgeon with expertise in a particular intervention. These trials minimize the bias that can arise from differential expertise bias and have the potential to improve the validity and feasibility of RCTs. Finally, there has been an increased focus on the reporting of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in orthopaedic RCTs. Alongside this movement has been the development of minimal important differences (MIDs) to define the changes that are relevant and meaningful to patients. Both PROs and MIDs should be taken into consideration when calculating the sample size and study power in clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Although marked improvements have been made in the design and implementation of trials, there is still considerable room for improvement. Adequately blinded and powered studies evaluating clinically important outcomes and differences should be key considerations in trial design moving forward.

The quality of diagnostic studies used for the diagnostic criteria of periprosthetic joint infections.

BACKGROUND: Although periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication following a total joint arthroplasty procedure, there remains uncertainty regarding the diagnosis of PJI due to the lack of a globally accepted, standardized definition. The goal of this review is to critically analyze the quality of the evidence used for the novel 2018 MSIS PJI definition and identify gaps and limitations with using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. METHODS: References from the modified 2018 MSIS definition for PJI by Parvizi et al. were retrieved and manually reviewed. A total of 11 studies were assessed using a validated QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: Many included studies had an unclear or high risk of bias for the Index Test domain due to a lack of blinding and lack of prespecified thresholds. A majority of studies utilized Youden's J statistic to optimize the thresholds which may diminish external validity. Likewise, several studies were assessed to have an unclear and high risk of bias for the Flow and Timing domain primarily due to a lack of reporting and a large number of exclusions. Overall, there was a low risk of bias for the choice of reference standard, its conduct and interpretation, as well as for the Patient Selection domain. CONCLUSION: Although the literature used for the MSIS 2018 PJI definition is fraught with potential sources of bias, there may be a trend toward an improvement in the quality of evidence when compared to the earlier definition of PJI.

Registries: Big data, bigger problems?

Patient registries have grown in size and number along with general computing power and digitization of the healthcare world. In contrast to databases, registries are typically patient data systematically created and collected for the express purpose of answering health-related questions. Registries can be disease-, procedure-, pathology-, or product-based in nature. Registry-based studies typically fit into Level II or III in the hierarchy of evidence-based medicine. However, a recent advent in the use of registry data has been the development and execution of registry-based trials, such as the TASTE trial, which may elevate registry-based studies into the realm of Level I evidence. Some strengths of registries include the sheer volume of data, the inclusion of a diverse set of participants, and their ability to be linked to other registries and databases. Limitations of registries include variable quality of the collected data, and a lack of active follow-up (which may underestimate rates of adverse events). As with any study type, the intended design does not automatically lead to a study of a certain quality. While no specific tool exists for assessing the quality of a registry-based study, some important considerations include ensuring the registry is appropriate for the question being asked, whether the patient population is representative, the presence of an appropriate comparison group, and the validity and generalizability of the registry in question. The future of clinical registries remains to be seen, but the incorporation of big data and machine learning algorithms will certainly play an important role.

Machine learning and artificial intelligence in research and healthcare.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a broad term referring to the application of computational algorithms that can analyze large data sets to classify, predict, or gain useful conclusions. Under the umbrella of AI is machine learning (ML). ML is the process of building or learning statistical models using previously observed real world data to predict outcomes, or categorize observations based on 'training' provided by humans. These predictions are then applied to future data, all the while folding in the new data into its perpetually improving and calibrated statistical model. The future of AI and ML in healthcare research is exciting and expansive. AI and ML are becoming cornerstones in the medical and healthcare-research domains and are integral in our continued processing and capitalization of robust patient EMR data. Considerations for the use and application of ML in healthcare settings include assessing the quality of data inputs and decision-making that serve as the foundations of the ML model, ensuring the end-product is interpretable, transparent, and ethical concerns are considered throughout the development process. The current and future applications of ML include improving the quality and quantity of data collected from EMRs to improve registry data, utilizing these robust datasets to improve and standardized research protocols and outcomes, clinical decision-making applications, natural language processing and improving the fundamentals of value-based care, to name only a few.

Management of giant cell tumors of the distal radius: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The treatment of giant cell tumors (GCT) of the distal radius remains challenging, with no consensus on the optimal surgical management. Surgical management remains the mainstay of treatment with options including intralesional curettage and en-bloc resection with reconstruction. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate and compare the outcomes of these two procedures. METHODS: Using OVID-Medline and Embase databases, a systematic literature search was performed. Comparative studies, assessing intralesional curettage and en-bloc resection in patients with GCTs of the distal radius, were included. Data regarding rates of local recurrence, metastasis, overall complications, and functional outcomes, were collected and analyzed. The ROBINS-I tool was utilized for risk of bias appraisal within each study outcome. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (n = 373 patients) reporting on 191 intralesional curettage procedures and 182 en-bloc resections were included in the analysis. The average age of participants was 31.9 (SD ± 2.4) years and average follow-up was 7.1 (SD ± 3.6) years. Patients that underwent intralesional curettage were more likely to develop local recurrence (Risk Ratio (RR) 3.3, 95% CI, [2.1, 5.4], p < 0.00001) when compared to patients that underwent en-bloc resection. In Campanacci grade 3 lesions, the risk for local recurrence was 5.9 (95% CI, [2.2, 16.3], p = 0.0006) times higher in patients that received intralesional curettage. Patients that underwent intralesional curettage showed an 84% reduction in the relative risk of developing overall complications compared to en-bloc resection (95% CI, [0.1, 0.4], p < 0.00001), and a larger decrease in Visual Analog Scale and lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores (p < 0.00001). Risk ratio for developing a local recurrence, with PMMA versus bone graft following an intralesional procedure was not significant (RR 1.2, 95% CI, [0.6, 2.6], p = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: In the surgical management of GCT of the distal radius, intralesional curettage increased local recurrence compared to en-bloc resection with reconstruction, particularly in grade 3 tumors. However, it led to significantly fewer operative complications, lower pain scores, and improved functional outcomes compared to en-bloc resection. Both treatment options remain relevant in the contemporary management of GCTs of the distal radius. Surgical decision making should include both patient and tumor factors when determining the optimal treatment strategy for these patients. LEVEL 3 EVIDENCE: Meta-analysis of Level 3 studies.

Quadratus lumborum block for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of quadratus lumborum nerve blocks (QLB) for pain control following elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) has increased substantially in recent years. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare outcomes from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) utilising QLBs following elective THA. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for RCTs perioperative QLBs for THA. Quantitative synthesis was conducted for pain scores, opioid consumption and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 7 RCTs with 429 patients undergoing THA were included. No differences in pain scores were demonstrated between QLBs and control interventions. Subgroup analysis demonstrated no differences between QLBs and sham procedures or active comparators. No differences in postoperative opioid consumption between QLB and control interventions was found. In trials reporting adverse events, they were rare and similar between groups. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was graded as low or very low. CONCLUSIONS: The current literature suggests that a QLB for THA does not reduce pain or opioid consumption compared to sham or active comparators.

Causes and predictors of failed same-day home discharge following primary hip and knee total joint arthroplasty: a Canadian perspective.

PURPOSE: Same-day home (SDH) discharge in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has increased in popularity in recent years. The objective of this study was to evaluate the causes and predictors of failed discharges in planned SDH patients. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of patients who underwent total knee (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) that were scheduled for SDH discharge between 01 April 2019 and 31 March 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, causes of failed discharge, perioperative variables, 30-day readmissions and 6-month reoperation rates were collected. Multivariate regression analysis was undertaken to identify independent predictors of failed discharge. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 527 consecutive patients. 101 (19%) patients failed SDH discharge. The leading causes were postoperative hypotension (20%) and patients who were ineligible for the SDH pathway (19%). 2 individual surgeons, later operative start time (OR 1.3; 95% CI, 1.15-1.55; p = 0.001), ASA class IV (OR 3.4; 95% CI, 1.4-8.2; p = 0.006) and undergoing a THA (OR 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.1, p = 0.004) were independent predictors of failed SDH discharge. No differences in age, BMI, gender, surgical approach or type of anaesthetic were found (p > 0.05). The 30-day readmission or 6-month reoperation were similar between groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Hypotension and inappropriate patient selection were the leading causes of failed SDH discharge. Significant variability existed between individual surgeons failed discharge rates. Patients undergoing a THA, classified as ASA IV or had a later operative start time were all more likely to fail SDH discharge.