24-Year-Old Patient with Klippel-Trenaunay Syndrome Underwent Cementless Robotic Cruciate-Retaining TKA: A Case Report.

CASE: A 24-year-old man with Klippel-Trenaunay syndrome (KTS) presented with severe knee osteoarthritis unresponsive to conservative measures. Owing to end-stage, debilitating arthritic symptoms, surgery was pursued. Careful preoperative, multidisciplinary planning/treatment included magnetic resonance imaging to characterize the venous malformations throughout the right lower extremity, preoperative sclerotherapy, sirolimus, and robotic-assisted cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA). CONCLUSION: Cementless robotic-assisted TKA with selective patellar resurfacing can be a viable option for young KTS patients with severe osteoarthritis when a meticulous multidisciplinary approach, including sclerotherapy and advanced imaging, is undertaken to analyze vascular abnormalities, minimize surgical risks, preserve bone stock, and optimize outcomes.

High Area Deprivation Index is Associated With Not Achieving the Patient-acceptable Symptom State After TKA.

BACKGROUND: The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) approximates a patient's relative socioeconomic deprivation. The ADI has been associated with increased healthcare use after TKA, but it is unknown whether there is an association with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Given that a high proportion of patients are dissatisfied with their results after TKA, and the large number of these procedures performed, knowledge of factors associated with PROMs may indicate opportunities to provide support to patients who might benefit from it. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is the ADI associated with achieving the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for pain, Joint Replacement (JR), and Physical Function (PS) short forms after TKA? (2) Is the ADI associated with achieving the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for the KOOS pain, JR, and PS short forms? METHODS: This was a retrospective study of data drawn from a longitudinally maintained database. Between January 2016 and July 2021, a total of 12,239 patients underwent unilateral TKA at a tertiary healthcare center. Of these, 92% (11,213) had available baseline PROM data and were potentially eligible. An additional 21% (2400) of patients were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 1 year or had incomplete data, leaving 79% (8813) for analysis here. The MCID is the smallest change in an outcome score that a patient is likely to perceive as a clinically important improvement, and the PASS refers to the threshold beyond which patients consider their symptoms acceptable and consistent with adequate functioning and well-being. MCIDs were calculated using a distribution-based method. Multivariable logistic regression models were created to investigate the association of ADI with 1-year PROMs while controlling for patient demographic variables. ADI was stratified into quintiles based on their distribution in our sample. Achievement of MCID and PASS thresholds was determined by the improvement between preoperative and 1-year PROMs. RESULTS: After controlling for patient demographic factors, ADI was not associated with an inability to achieve the MCID for the KOOS pain, KOOS PS, or KOOS JR. A higher ADI was independently associated with an increased risk of inability to achieve the PASS for KOOS pain (for example, the odds ratio of those in the ADI category of 83 to 100 compared with those in the 1 to 32 category was 1.34 [95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.58]) and KOOS JR (for example, the OR of those in the ADI category of 83 to 100 compared with those in the 1 the 32 category was 1.29 [95% CI 1.10 to 1.53]), but not KOOS PS (for example, the OR of those in the ADI category of 83 to 100 compared with those in the 1 the 32 category was 1.09 [95% CI 0.92 to 1.29]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that social and economic factors are associated with patients' perceptions of their overall pain and function after TKA, but such factors are not associated with patients' perceptions of their improvement in symptoms. Patients from areas with higher deprivation may be an at-risk population and could benefit from targeted interventions to improve their perception of their healthcare experience, such as through referrals to nonemergent medical transportation and supporting applications to local care coordination services before proceeding with TKA. Future research should investigate the mechanisms underlying why socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with inability to achieve the PASS, but not the MCID, after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Custom Triflange Acetabular Implants for Complex Hip Revisions: A Case Series.

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) presents a formidable challenge when addressing extensive acetabular defects, particularly in severe cases classified under Paprosky types 3A and 3B and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons types 3 and 4. Traditional methods often fall short, prompting the potential use of custom triflange acetabular components or patient-specific acetabular implants (PSAIs). These implants are specifically designed to conform to an individual's anatomy, aiming to enhance defect reconstruction and pelvic stabilization. This case series describes the utilization of advanced 3-dimensional printing and rapid prototyping technologies to construct customized acetabular components, which can be instrumental in enabling precise preoperative planning and surgical execution for these difficult acetabular cases and potentially leading to improved surgical outcomes.

Clinical Significance Thresholds in Primary and Revision Latarjet Procedures With Comparable Outcome Achievements.

BACKGROUND: Given the variability across populations and settings, defining the MCID and the PASS for the Rowe and ASOSS scores and patients undergoing primary and revision Latarjet it is essential to have accurate benchmarks relevant to these groups when interpreting clinical results. PURPOSE: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain during sports, Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS), and Rowe scores after primary and revision Latarjet procedures for treatment of shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Between January 2018 and January 2020, a retrospective review of 149 patients undergoing primary Latarjet (n = 82) and revision Latarjet (n = 67) to treat shoulder instability was performed in a single institution. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The delta was defined as the change between the pre- and postoperative scores. Distribution-based and anchored-based approaches were used to estimate the MCID and the PASS, respectively. The optimal cutoff point and the percentage of patients achieving those thresholds were also calculated. RESULTS: The distribution-based MCIDs after primary Latarjet were 1.1, 7.5, and 9.6 for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The rates of patients who achieved the MCID thresholds were 93.9%, 98.7%, and 100% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The PASS thresholds after primary Latarjet were ≤1, ≥90, and ≥85 for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The percentages of patients who achieved PASS thresholds were 82.9%, 89%, and 86.5% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The distribution-based MCIDs after revision Latarjet were 0.6, 6.2, and 3.4 for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The rates of patients who achieved MCID thresholds were 89.3%, 100%, and 100% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The PASS thresholds were ≤3, ≥87, and ≥86 after revision Latarjet for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The rates of patients who achieved the PASS thresholds were 88%, 88%, and 91% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study identified useful values for the MCID and PASS thresholds in VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores after primary and revision Latarjet procedures for treating shoulder instability. Most patients achieved MCID and PASS benchmarks, indicating successful primary and revision Latarjet procedure outcomes. These metrics can serve as valuable parameters when analyzing parameters in future studies and have the potential to enhance patient care by optimizing treatment strategies and surgical decision making.

Return to play following operative management of anterior shoulder instability in overhead athletes-A systematic review.

Background: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the rate and timing of return to play in overhead athletes following operative management of anterior shoulder instability. Methods: A systematic literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Eligible for inclusion were clinical studies reporting on return to play among overhead athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair, open Latarjet procedure or Remplissage procedure. Results: There are 23 studies included with 961 patients. Among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair, the rate of return to play was 86.2%, with 70.6% returning to the same level of play and the mean time to return to play was 7.1 months. Among those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure, the rate of return to play was 80.9%, with 77.7% returning to the same level of play and the mean time to return to play was 5.1 months. Among those undergoing a Remplissage procedure, the rate of return to play was 70.6%, with 70.0% returning to the same level of play or mean time to return to play. Discussion: Overall, there were high rates of return to play following operative management of anterior shoulder instability in overhead athletes.

Patient satisfaction and patient-reported outcomes do not vary by BMI class in total hip arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Obesity has been identified as a risk factor for postoperative complications in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to investigate patient-reported outcomes, pain, and satisfaction as a function of body mass index (BMI) class in patients undergoing THA. METHODS: 1736 patients within a prospective observational study were categorized into BMI classes. Pre- and postoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS JR), satisfaction, and pain scores were compared by BMI class using one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Healthy weight patients reported the highest preoperative HOOS JR (56.66 ± 13.35) compared to 45.51 ± 14.45 in Class III subjects. Healthy weight and Class III patients reported the lowest (5.65 ± 2.01) and highest (7.06 ± 1.98, p < 0.0001) preoperative pain, respectively. Changes in HOOS JR scores from baseline suggest larger improvements with increasing BMI class, where Class III patients reported an increase of 33.7 ± 15.6 points at 90 days compared to 26.1 ± 17.1 in healthy weight individuals (p = 0.002). Fewer healthy weight patients achieved the minimal clinically important difference (87.4%) for HOOS JR compared to Class II (96.5%) and III (94.7%) obesity groups at 90 days postoperatively. Changes in satisfaction and pain scores were largest in the Class III patients. Overall, no functional outcomes varied by BMI class postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Patients of higher BMI class reported greater improvements following THA. While risk/benefit shared decision-making remains a personalized requirement of THA, this study highlights that utilization of BMI cutoff may not be warranted based on pain and functional improvement.

Enabling Personalized Medicine in Orthopaedic Surgery Through Artificial Intelligence: A Critical Analysis Review.

¼ The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field of orthopaedic surgery holds potential for revolutionizing health care delivery across 3 crucial domains: (I) personalized prediction of clinical outcomes and adverse events, which may optimize patient selection, surgical planning, and enhance patient safety and outcomes; (II) diagnostic automated and semiautomated imaging analyses, which may reduce time burden and facilitate precise and timely diagnoses; and (III) forecasting of resource utilization, which may reduce health care costs and increase value for patients and institutions.¼ Computer vision is one of the most highly studied areas of AI within orthopaedics, with applications pertaining to fracture classification, identification of the manufacturer and model of prosthetic implants, and surveillance of prosthesis loosening and failure.¼ Prognostic applications of AI within orthopaedics include identifying patients who will likely benefit from a specified treatment, predicting prosthetic implant size, postoperative length of stay, discharge disposition, and surgical complications. Not only may these applications be beneficial to patients but also to institutions and payors because they may inform potential cost expenditure, improve overall hospital efficiency, and help anticipate resource utilization.¼ AI infrastructure development requires institutional financial commitment and a team of clinicians and data scientists with expertise in AI that can complement skill sets and knowledge. Once a team is established and a goal is determined, teams (1) obtain, curate, and label data; (2) establish a reference standard; (3) develop an AI model; (4) evaluate the performance of the AI model; (5) externally validate the model, and (6) reinforce, improve, and evaluate the model's performance until clinical implementation is possible.¼ Understanding the implications of AI in orthopaedics may eventually lead to wide-ranging improvements in patient care. However, AI, while holding tremendous promise, is not without methodological and ethical limitations that are essential to address. First, it is important to ensure external validity of programs before their use in a clinical setting. Investigators should maintain high quality data records and registry surveillance, exercise caution when evaluating others' reported AI applications, and increase transparency of the methodological conduct of current models to improve external validity and avoid propagating bias. By addressing these challenges and responsibly embracing the potential of AI, the medical field may eventually be able to harness its power to improve patient care and outcomes.

How to Raise the Bar in the Capture of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: Results from Active and Passive Follow-up Measures.

BACKGROUND: With the upcoming U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2027 policy for mandatory reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA or TKA), it is important to evaluate the resources required to achieve adequate PROM collection and reporting at a clinically relevant rate of follow-up. This study aimed to (1) determine follow-up rates for 1-year PROMs when the follow-up was conducted with active methods (attempted contact by staff) and passive (automated) methods, and (2) evaluate factors associated with higher odds of requiring active follow-up or being lost to follow-up following THA or TKA. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing primary elective THA (n = 7,436) or TKA (n = 10,119) between January 2016 and December 2020 at a single institution were included. The primary outcome was the response rate achieved with active and passive follow-up methods at our institution. Patient characteristics, health-care utilization parameters, PROM values, and patient satisfaction were compared between follow-up methods. RESULTS: Passive and active measures were successful for 38% (2,859) and 40% (3,004) of the THA cohort, respectively, while 21% (1,573) were lost to follow-up. Similarly, passive and active measures were successful for 40% (4,001) and 41% (4,161) of the TKA cohort, respectively, while 20% (2,037) were lost to follow-up. Younger age, male sex, Black or another non-White race, fewer years of education, smoking, Medicare or Medicaid insurance, and specific baseline PROM phenotypes (i.e., with scores in the lower half for pain, function, and/or mental health) were associated with loss to follow-up. Older age, male sex, Black race, and a residence with a higher Area Deprivation Index were associated with requiring active follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: One of 5 patients were lost to follow-up despite active and passive measures following THA or TKA. These patients were more likely to be younger, be male, be of Black or another non-White race, have fewer years of education, be a smoker, have Medicaid insurance, and have specific baseline PROM phenotypes. Innovative strategies aimed at targeting individuals with these baseline characteristics may help raise the bar and increase follow-up while mitigating costs after total joint arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for massive rotator cuff tears without glenohumeral arthritis can improve clinical outcomes despite history of prior rotator cuff repair: A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is often used to surgically address massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCT) without arthritis. The impact of prior attempted rotator cuff repair (RCR) on outcomes is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to compare functional outcomes, range of motion, and complications in patients with a MIRCT without arthritis who underwent RSA as a primary procedure versus after prior RCR. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A systematic review was performed on RSA for a MIRCT. The search was conducted from February to March of 2022 using the MEDLINE database. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and complications were extracted. These outcomes were weighted and analysed based on whether the reverse was performed as the primary procedure or following a prior RCR. FINDINGS: Seven studies were included in the analysis, consisting of 343 cases in the primary RSA group and 95 cases in the prior RCR group, with a mean follow-up of 40.8 months. There were no demographic differences between cohorts. Postoperative PROs and ROM were comparable between groups, although the prior RCR group had a higher maximal percentage of improvement (MPI%) for the Constant-Murley Score and Simple Shoulder Test. There was a higher risk for complications (relative risk [RR] 6.26) and revisions (RR 3.91) in the prior RCR group. The most common complications were acromial stress fractures and prosthetic dislocation. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Patients undergoing RSA for MIRCT following a prior RCR have functional outcomes that are largely comparable to those who have a primary RSA, but they may be at higher risk of complications and revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

New CMS Policy on the Mandatory Collection of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty by 2027: What Orthopaedic Surgeons Should Know.

ABSTRACT: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has finalized a landmark national policy to standardize and expand the collection and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This policy will be rolled out through phased implementation, beginning with voluntary reporting starting in 2023 and transitioning to mandatory reporting starting in 2025, which will be tied to hospital payment determinations in fiscal year 2028. The overarching goal of this policy is to gather meaningful pre- and postoperative PROM data directly from patients to enhance clinical care, shared decision-making, and quality measurement for these common elective procedures. This national initiative underscores the value of incorporating patient perspectives and priorities into assessments of surgical care quality. For orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals, participating in the initial voluntary reporting period provides an opportunity to integrate PROM collection into clinical workflows and to leverage these data to improve patient care. The achievement of robust PROM response rates and a strong performance on the underlying THA/TKA Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measure may have increasing relevance as payment models shift toward value-based care. The aim of the present forum was to provide an in-depth review of this new CMS policy and key details regarding required PROM instruments, data-collection time frames, and other specifications that surgical teams should understand as they prepare for implementation. The goal was to equip orthopaedic surgeons with actionable information as they embark on this new era of national PROM collection and reporting.

Outpatient Total Hip Arthroplasty Volume up Nearly 8-Fold After Regulatory Changes With Expanding Demographics and Unchanging Outcomes: A 10-Year Analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the removal of total hip arthroplasty (THA) from the inpatient-only (IPO) lists, the orthopedic landscape across the United States has changed rapidly. Thus, this study aimed to: 1) characterize the change in THA volume for outpatient and inpatient surgeries; 2) elucidate demographical differences before and after removal from the IPO list; and 3) analyze 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for primary THAs between January 2010 and December 2021. The primary outcome was the annual volume of outpatient and inpatient THAs. Secondary outcomes involved 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations. The variables between cohorts were analyzed using goodness-of-fit Chi-square tests with summary statistics. RESULTS: Of the 332,423 THAs between 2010 and 2021, 88% were inpatient THAs (n = 292,974) and 12% were outpatient THAs (n = 39,449). From 2019 to 2021, the volume of inpatient THA decreased by 55% (42,779 to 19,075), while outpatient THA increased by 751% (2,518 to 21,424). Patients who had a THA after 2019 were older (P < .001), more commonly women (P < .001), white (P < .001), and more likely American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III (P < .001). The outpatient cohort had fewer 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations. The length of stay for both cohorts decreased until 2019, before increasing in 2020 and 2021 for inpatient THAs, while home discharge and operative time increased for both. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of outpatient THA increased almost eightfold after its removal from the IPO lists in 2020. Despite expanding eligibility with older patients and more comorbidities, 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations remain low. These findings support the safe transition to outpatient THA with appropriate patient selection and optimization.

What Are the Diagnosis-Specific Thresholds of Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State in Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) pain, physical short form (PS), and joint replacement (JR) 1 year after primary total hip arthroplasty stratified by preoperative diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) versus non-OA. METHODS: A prospective institutional cohort of 5,887 patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (January 2016 to December 2018) was included. There were 4,184 patients (77.0%) who completed a one-year follow-up. Demographics, comorbidities, and baseline and one-year HOOS pain, PS, and JR scores were recorded. Patients were stratified by preoperative diagnosis: OA or non-OA. Minimal detectable change (MDC) and MCIDs were estimated using a distribution-based approach. The PASS values were estimated using an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at one year post surgery. RESULTS: The MCID thresholds were slightly higher in the non-OA cohort versus OA patients. (HOOS-Pain: OA: 8.35 versus non-OA: 8.85 points; HOOS-PS: OA: 9.47 versus non-OA: 9.90 points; and HOOS-JR: OA: 7.76 versus non-OA: 8.46 points). Similarly, all MDC thresholds were consistently higher in the non-OA cohort compared to OA patients. The OA cohort exhibited similar or higher PASS thresholds compared to the non-OA cohort for HOOS-Pain (OA: ≥80.6 versus non-OA: ≥77.5 points), HOOS-PS (OA: ≥83.6 versus non-OA: ≥83.6 points), and HOOS-JR (OA: ≥76.8 versus non-OA: ≥73.5 points). A similar percentage of patients achieved MCID and PASS thresholds regardless of preoperative diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: While MCID and MDC thresholds for all HOOS subdomains were slightly higher among non-OA than OA patients, PASS thresholds for HOOS pain and JR were slightly higher in the OA group. The absolute magnitude of the difference in these thresholds may not be sufficient to cause major clinical differences. However, these subtle differences may have a significant impact when used as indicators of operative success in a population setting.

Does Your Patient Need to Lose Weight? Weight Change Before and After Total Hip Arthroplasty Does Not Affect Health Care Utilization and Achievement of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference.

BACKGROUND: Despite the potential negative impact of preoperative obesity on total hip arthroplasty (THA) outcomes, the association between preoperative and postoperative weight change and outcomes is much less understood. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the impact of preoperative and postoperative weight change and preoperative body mass index (BMI) on health care utilization, satisfaction, and achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short-Form (HOOS PS) and HOOS Pain. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary elective unilateral THA between January 2016 and December 2019 were included (N = 2,868). Multivariable logistic regression assessed the association between BMI and preoperative and postoperative weight change on outcomes while controlling for demographic characteristics. RESULTS: There was no association between preoperative weight change and prolonged length of stay (> 3 days), 90-day readmission, nonhome discharge, patient dissatisfaction at 1 year, or achievement of HOOS Pain or HOOS PS MCID. Postoperative weight loss was an independent risk factor for patient dissatisfaction at 1 year but was not associated with achievement of either HOOS Pain or HOOS PS MCID at 1-year postoperative. Preoperative obesity classes I to III were independent risk factors for nonhome discharge. Nevertheless, preoperative obesity class I and class II were associated with an increased probability of reaching HOOS Pain MCID. Preoperative BMI was not associated with an increased risk of patient dissatisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative weight change does not appear to influence health care utilization, satisfaction, or achievement of MCID in pain and function following THA. Postoperative weight loss may play a role as a risk factor for dissatisfaction following THA. Additionally, patients who had a higher baseline BMI may be more likely to see improvement in pain following THA. Therefore, when counseling obese patients for THA, surgeons must balance the risk of perioperative complications with the expectation of greater improvements in pain.

Surgical Management of Massive Irreparable Cuff Tears: Superior Capsule Reconstruction and Rotator Cable Reconstruction.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCTs) present treatment challenges. Recently, superior capsule reconstruction (SCR) and anterior cable reconstruction have emerged as surgical options, but no single approach is superior. This review provides an overview of SCR and cable reconstruction techniques, including biomechanical studies, clinical outcomes, and surgical considerations. RECENT FINDINGS: Biomechanical studies show SCR with autografts or allografts improves glenohumeral stability and mechanics. Clinical outcomes of SCR demonstrate improved range of motion, function scores, and pain relief in short-term studies. Anterior cable reconstruction reduces superior humeral head translation and subacromial pressures in biomechanical models. Early clinical studies report improved rotator cuff healing and outcomes for cable reconstruction in specific irreparable tear patterns. SCR and cable reconstruction are viable surgical options for MIRCTs based on early encouraging results. However, higher-level comparative studies with long-term follow-up are still needed. Careful consideration of tear pattern, patient factors, and surgical goals is required to optimize treatment of MIRCTs. Further research is necessary to determine the optimal role for these procedures.

Lower 90-day inpatient readmission and 1-year reoperation in patients undergoing robotic versus manual total hip arthroplasty through an anterior approach.

BACKGROUND: The value of robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) has yet to be determined compared to conventional manual THA (mTHA). OBJECTIVE: Evaluate 90-day inpatient readmission rates, rates of reoperation, and clinically significant improvement of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 1-year in a cohort of patients who underwent mTHA or rTHA through a direct anterior (DA) approach. METHODS: A single-surgeon, prospective institutional cohort of 362 patients who underwent primary THA for osteoarthritis via the DA approach between February 2019 and November 2020 were included. Patient demographics, surgical time, discharge disposition, length of stay, acetabular cup size, 90-day inpatient readmission, 1-year reoperation, and 1-year PROMs were collected for 148 manual and 214 robotic THAs, respectively. RESULTS: Patients undergoing rTHA had lower 90-day readmission (3.74% vs 9.46%, p= 0.04) and lower 1-year reoperation (0.93% vs 4.73% mTHA, p= 0.04). rTHA acetabular cup sizes were smaller (rTHA median 52, interquartile range [IQR] 50; 54, mTHA median 54, IQR 52; 58, p< 0.001). Surgical time was longer for rTHA (114 minutes vs 101 minutes, p< 0.001). At 1-year post-operatively, there was no difference in any of the PROMs evaluated. CONCLUSION: Robotic THA demonstrated lower 90-day readmissions and 1-year reoperation rates than manual THA via the DA approach. PROMs were not significantly different between the two groups at one year.

Are Femoral Stems in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Cost Effective in High Fracture Risk Patients? A Risk Model and Cost Analysis.

Femoral stemmed total knee arthroplasty (FS TKA) may be used in patients deemed higher risk for periprosthetic fracture (PPF) to reduce PPF risk. However, the cost effectiveness of FS TKA has not been defined. Using a risk modeling analysis, we investigate the cost effectiveness of FS in primary TKA compared with the implant cost of revision to distal femoral replacement (DFR) following PPF. A model of risk categories was created representing patients at increasing fracture risk, ranging from 2.5 to 30%. The number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated for each risk category, which was multiplied by the increased cost of FS TKA and compared with the cost of DFR. The 50th percentile implant pricing data for primary TKA, FS TKA, and DFR were identified and used for the analysis. FS TKA resulted in an increased cost of $2,717.83, compared with the increased implant cost of DFR of $27,222.29. At 50% relative risk reduction with FS TKA, the NNT for risk categories of 2.5, 10, 20, and 30% were 80, 20, 10, and 6.67, respectively. At 20% risk, FS TKA times NNT equaled $27,178.30. A 10% absolute risk reduction in fracture risk obtained with FS TKA is needed to achieve cost neutrality with DFR. FS TKA is not cost effective for low fracture risk patients but may be cost effective for patients with fracture risk more than 20%. Further study is needed to better define the quantifiable risk reduction achieved in using FS TKA and identify high-risk PPF patients.

Despite Greater Improvement in Pain and Function Among Obese Patients Shortly After Total Knee Arthroplasty, There is No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes and Satisfaction Between Body Mass Index Classes at 1 Year Postoperatively.

BACKGROUND: Although obesity may be associated with an increased risk of perioperative and postoperative complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), body mass index (BMI) cutoffs for TKA patient selection remain a controversial topic. This study aimed to investigate patient-reported outcomes, satisfaction, and pain among BMI classes at 3 months and 1 year following TKA. METHODS: A total of 2,365 patients were categorized into Centers for Disease Control BMI classes according to preoperative values. The BMI distribution over the cohort demonstrated 7 underweight, 340 healthy weight, 731 overweight, 666 Class I, 391 Class II, and 230 Class III obesity. Preoperative and postoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR), satisfaction, and pain scores were compared by BMI class by Analysis of Variance with pairwise comparisons. RESULTS: Preoperative KOOS JR scores and satisfaction scores were both significantly greater for healthy weight patients compared to Class III patients (P < .0001). However, KOOS JR, satisfaction, and pain did not vary by BMI class postoperatively. Changes in scores from baseline suggest larger improvements with increasing BMI class, where Class III patients reported the greatest improvements in KOOS JR (23.24 ± 15.67, P < .0001) and pain scores (-3.56 ± 2.65, P < .0001) at 90 days. Significantly greater improvement with increasing BMI was also present at 1-year postoperatively for KOOS JR scores. A total of 85.8% of Class III patients reached the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for KOOS JR at 90 days compared to 76.8% of the healthy weight group (P = .03). Differences between BMI groups in the proportion reaching Minimal Clinically Important Difference at 1 year were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients of higher BMI reported greater and earlier improvements in satisfaction, knee function, and pain following TKA. Shared decision-making remains paramount to preoperative surgical evaluation. However, rationing of this surgical intervention based on BMI alone may not be warranted.

Diagnosis-Specific Thresholds of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State for KOOS After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Literature-reported minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for patient-reported outcome measures demonstrate marked variability. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), MCID, and PASS thresholds for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain subdomain, Physical Function Short Form (PS), and Joint Replacement (JR) among patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: A prospective cohort of 6,778 patients who underwent primary TKA was analyzed. Overall, 1-year follow-up was completed by 5,316 patients for the KOOS Pain, 5,018 patients for the KOOS PS, and 4,033 patients for the KOOS JR. A total of 5,186 patients had an OA diagnosis; this group had an average age of 67.0 years and was 59.9% female and 80.4% White. Diagnosis-specific MDCs and MCIDs were estimated with use of a distribution-based approach. PASS values were estimated with use of an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: The MCID thresholds for the OA group were 7.9 for the KOOS Pain, 8.0 for the KOOS PS, and 6.7 for the KOOS JR. A high percentage of patients achieved the MCID threshold for each outcome measure (KOOS Pain, 95%; KOOS PS, 88%; and KOOS JR, 94%). The MDC 80% to 95% confidence intervals ranged from 9.1 to 14.0 for the KOOS Pain, 9.2 to 14.1 for the KOOS PS, and 7.7 to 11.8 for the KOOS JR. The PASS thresholds for the OA group were 77.7 for the KOOS Pain (achieved by 73% of patients), 70.3 for the KOOS PS (achieved by 68% of patients), and 70.7 for the KOOS JR (achieved by 70% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: The present study provided useful MCID, MDC, and PASS thresholds for the KOOS Pain, PS, and JR for patients with OA. The diagnosis-specific metrics established herein can serve as benchmarks for clinically meaningful postoperative improvement. Future research and quality assessments should utilize these OA-specific thresholds when evaluating outcomes following TKA. Doing so will enable more accurate determinations of operative success and improvements in patient-centered care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Effect of Patient Characteristics on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair.

BACKGROUND: There is scarce literature on clinically significant values after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). PURPOSE: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds at 1 year for the Rowe and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) scores after ABR and to determine the effect of patient characteristics on these metrics after ABR. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing ABR from a single institution between January 2017 and January 2020 was performed. Patients with at least 1 episode of instability and a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. The exclusion criteria were as follows: bony defects of >20% on the anteroinferior portion of the glenoid based on a preoperative computed tomography scan; engaging Hill-Sachs lesions at 90° of abduction and 90° of external rotation based on an arthroscopic examination; previous surgery on the same shoulder; multidirectional instability or concomitant repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears; superior labral anterior to posterior lesions; posterior labral tears; or humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament lesions. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected both preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Delta was defined as the change between preoperative and 1-year postoperative scores. Distribution-based (one-half the standard deviation of the difference between pre- and postoperative outcome scores) and anchored-based approaches (response to a satisfaction question at 1 year) were used to estimate the MCID and the PASS, respectively. The optimal cutoff point, where sensitivity and specificity were maximized, and the percentage of patients achieving those thresholds were also calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 190 patients were included. The distribution-based MCID for the Rowe and ASOSS scores were calculated to be 8.2 and 8.7, respectively. The rate of patients who achieved MCID thresholds was 96% for the Rowe and 96% for ASOSS scores. The PASS threshold for the Rowe and ASOSS scores were ≥80 and ≥90, respectively. The rate of patients who achieved PASS scores after ABR were 86% and 83%, respectively. The MCID and PASS values showed great variability based on sex (men: 8.5 and ≥85 for Rowe / 8.9 and ≥90 for ASOSS, respectively, vs women: 6.7 and ≥73 for Rowe / 8.1 and ≥75 for ASOSS), age (≥21: 8.4 and ≥80 / 9.2 and ≥90 vs <21: 7.8 and ≥75 / 7.7 and ≥85), sports participation (sports: 8.8 and ≥85 / 9.5 and ≥90 vs no sports: 8.1 and ≥75 / 8.6 and ≥80), and type of athlete (competitive: 8.4 and ≥85 / 8.9 and ≥87 vs recreational: 7.5 and ≥73 / 8.1 and ≥68). CONCLUSION: This study identified the MCID and PASS thresholds for the Rowe and ASOSS scores at 1 year after ABR. However, these values showed great variability when accounting for different patient characteristics such as sex, age, sports participation, and type of athlete, highlighting the importance of considering individual patient-specific characteristics for optimal treatment decision-making and ensuring treatment success tailored to each patient's unique needs and expectations.

Journal Metrics of Orthopaedic Journals between 2016 and 2021: Trends and Comparisons with Other Specialties.

Bibliometric analysis plays a crucial role in elucidating publication trends and aids scholars in gauging the reach of prospective journals for their research dissemination. Concerns with impact factor (IF) have led us to examine the trends in IF, corrected IF (cIF), and Citescore in orthopaedic journals from 2016 to 2021 and compare them with internal medicine and general surgery journals. Journal IF and cIF were obtained from Journal Citation Reports and Citescore data from the Elsevier Scopus database for the years 2016 to 2021. Orthopaedic journals were categorized, and 10 medicine and surgery journals were selected for comparison. Mean values were analyzed to identify trends. The study included 52 orthopaedic journals, evenly split between the United States and the rest of the world, predominantly publishing in English. Mean IF in orthopaedic journals increased from 1.93 (2016) to 2.78 (2021), with similar rises in cIF and Citescore. These trends were consistent in specialty and general orthopaedic journals. No significant differences were found in mean IF between these categories. Medicine and surgery journals also experienced significant IF increases. Orthopaedic journals have experienced growing esteem and extent from 2016 to 2021. Specialty and general orthopaedic journals showed parallel growth. Researchers can utilize this analysis for informed publishing decisions, potentially expanding their readership.