Virtual versus in-person physiotherapy following total knee arthroplasty: a comparative analysis.

PURPOSE: At our centre, we developed and implemented a video-based post-operative physiotherapy program for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Our aims were to analyse and compare the outcomes of this program to in-person physiotherapy. METHODS: We reviewed the outcomes of 112 patients and captured range-of-motion (ROM) measurements and pain scores (P4 questionnaire). We compared the outcomes to a cohort of 175 patients undergoing in-person therapy. Comparative analysis was performed using a two-tailed Student's t-test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, sex, or initial post-operative knee ROM. On discharge from virtual physiotherapy, mean flexion was 122.6° (SD 7.6). There was no significant difference in improvement in knee flexion between the virtual and in-person groups (mean 30.6° vs 34.0°, p = 0.07). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 120° of flexion (85.0% virtual vs 91.3% in-person, p = 0.11) or those achieving an extension deficit of ≤ 5° (96.0% vs 98.3%, p = 0.25). There was no difference in the number of PT visits to discharge (10.5 vs 11.1, p = 0.14) or final pain scores (12.4 vs 11.9, p = 0.61). CONCLUSION: Improvements in knee ROM measures are comparable between virtual and in-person physiotherapy with both groups achieving a good functional range. These findings have implications for the virtual delivery of healthcare, especially among remote populations and patients with mobility limitations.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on equity of access to hip and knee replacements: a population-level study.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic had innumerable impacts on healthcare delivery. In Canada, this included limitations on inpatient capacity, which resulted in an increased focus on outpatient surgery for non-emergent cases such as joint replacements. The objective of this study was to assess whether the pandemic and the shift towards outpatient surgery had an impact on access to joint replacement for marginalized patients. METHODS: Data from Ontario's administrative healthcare databases were obtained for all patients undergoing an elective hip or knee replacement between January 1, 2018 and August 31, 2021. All surgeries performed before March 15, 2020 were classified as "pre-COVID," while all procedures performed after that date were classified as "post-COVID." The Ontario Marginalization Index domains were used to analyze proportion of marginalized patients undergoing surgery pre- and post-COVID. RESULTS: A total of 102,743 patients were included-42,812 hip replacements and 59,931 knee replacements. There was a significant shift towards outpatient surgery during the post-COVID period (1.1% of all cases pre-COVID to 13.2% post-COVID, p < 0.001). In the post-COVID cohort, there were significantly fewer patients from some marginalized groups, as well as fewer patients with certain co-morbidities, such as congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSION: The most important finding of this population-level database study is that, compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a change in the profile of patients undergoing hip and knee replacements in Ontario, specifically across a range of indicators. Fewer marginalized patients are undergoing joint replacement surgery since the COVID-19 pandemic. Further monitoring of access to joint replacement surgery is required in order to ensure that surgery is provided to those who are most in need.

In-hospital outcomes following primary and revision total hip arthroplasty in nonagenarian patients.

PURPOSE: The primary goal of this study was to assess the risk of postoperative surgical and medical complications and problems among nonagenarian patients operated with hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Data from a specific high-volume arthroplasty clinic, were collected to evaluate postoperative morbidity and complication rates after hip arthroplasty in nonagenarians, compared with a control group of younger, but similar patients. Outcomes evaluated included length of stay, transfusion rate, and postoperative medical and surgical complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 97 nonagenarian patients (mean age 91.4 years) were included, and compared with 89 control group patients (mean age 70.18 years). Nonagenarian patients had significantly longer length of stay (11.44 vs. 7.98 days, p < 0.01), significantly higher risk of needing a transfusion (11.30% vs. 3.40%, p = 0.04), and significantly higher risk of a postoperative medical complication (28.90% vs. 11.20%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in postoperative surgical complication rate (7.20% vs. 2.20%, p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Nonagenarian patients, when compared to a younger control group, experience significantly longer hospital stays, and risk of non-surgical complications. Arthroplasty in nonagenarian patients carries with it a high risk of complications, and thus careful pre-operative evaluation and the care of these patients at high volume, specialized clinics is important to optimize outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III retrospective cohort analysis.

Unexpected Positive Cultures in Patients Who Have a History of Septic Revision in the Same Joint.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of unexpected positive cultures (UPC) in an aseptic revision surgery of the joint with a prior septic revision in the same joint remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of UPC in that specific group. As secondary outcomes, we explored risk factors for UPC. METHODS: This retrospective study includes patients who had an aseptic revision total hip/knee arthroplasty procedure with a prior septic revision in the same joint. Patients who had less than 3 microbiology samples, without joint aspiration or with aseptic revision surgery performed <3 weeks after a septic revision were excluded. The UPC was defined as a single positive culture in a revision that the surgeon had classified as aseptic according to the 2018 International Consensus Meeting. After excluding 47, a total of 92 patients were analyzed, who had a mean age of 70 years (range, 38 to 87). There were 66 (71.7%) hips and 26 (28.3%) knees. The mean time between revisions was 83 months (range, 31 to 212). RESULTS: We identified 11 (12%) UPC and in 3 cases there was a concordance of the bacteria compared to the previous septic surgery. There were no differences for UPC between hips/knees (P = .282), diabetes (P = .701), immunosuppression (P = .252), previous 1-stage or 2-stages (P = .316), causes for the aseptic revision (P = .429) and time after the septic revision (P = .773). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of UPC in this specific group was similar to those reported in the literature for aseptic revisions. More studies are needed to better interpret the results.

What is the rate of successful closed reduction of dislocated dual mobility cups following complex revision hip arthroplasty?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the difference in success rates of closed reduction in septic and aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed with a dual mobility (DM) implant. Our objective was to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a difference in success rates of closed reduction between septic and aseptic revision THA with a DM implant? (2) Is closed or open reduction more successful in preventing re-dislocation? METHODS: Between January 2009 and October 2021, 924 revisions were performed with a DM implant. All patients presenting to our institution with a dislocation following septic or aseptic revision THA using a cemented DM cup were included in this study. We analyzed 106 cases of dislocation in 74 patients. For all patients, we collected reason for revision, and classified index surgery as septic or aseptic. RESULTS: Overall, 106 dislocations occurred (106/924, 11.5%). Thirty-nine cases (52.7%) had a dislocation after a septic exchange THA, while in 35 patients (47.3%), a dislocation occurred after an aseptic rTHA. In 29 patients (39.2%), successful closed reduction under general anesthesia was feasible, while the majority of cases required open reduction. In 31 of these patients (67.4%), open reduction was combined with a revision arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: In case of DM cup dislocation, there is a low success rate of closed reduction. To prevent re-dislocation, total revision leads to a significantly reduced risk compared to open or closed reduction alone. Careful X-ray analysis for a halo sign showing intra-prosthetic DM cup dislocation is mandatory to avoid futile reduction attempts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Do Adhesive Drapes Have an Effect on Infection Rates in Orthopaedic Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adhesive surgical drapes are purported to reduce the rates of surgical site infection. Despite that, international surgical guidelines generally recommend against the use of such drapes; however, this is primarily based on nonorthopaedic evidence. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does the use of adhesive drapes decrease the risk of wound contamination? (2) Does intraoperative drape peeling (intentional or inadvertent) increase the risk of wound contamination? (3) Does the use of adhesive drapes decrease the risk of surgical site infection? METHODS: A systematic review of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook methods for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published since 2000 and comparing adhesive drapes with controls. All databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2021. A pooled meta-analysis was performed, where possible. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess risk of bias among the included studies. From among 417 search results, five eligible RCTs were identified and included, all of which were published between 2018 and 2020. There were a total of 2266 patients, with 1129 (49.8%) in the adhesive drape groups, and 1137 (50.2%) in the control groups. The studies included hip and knee surgery trials (n = 3 trials; 1020 patients in intervention groups and 1032 patients in control groups) as well as trials on shoulder arthroscopy (n = 1 trial; 65 patients in the intervention group and 61 patients in the control group) and lumbar spine surgery (n = 1 trial; 44 patients in each group). The data for all three outcomes (wound contamination, impact of intraoperative peeling, and surgical site infection) revealed low heterogeneity based on random-effects models (I2 = 14%, 0%, and 0%, respectively). RESULTS: Based on data from pooled wound swab culture results from four studies, a reduction in wound contamination was associated with the use of adhesive drapes (odds ratio 0.49 [95% CI 0.34 to 0.72]; p < 0.001). The available evidence was inconclusive to determine whether intraoperative drape peeling (intentional or inadvertent) influenced the risk of wound contamination. Three studies did not report on this outcome, one study found an increased infection rate with drape peel back, and another study found a reduced treatment effect of adhesive drapes when peel back occurred in a subgroup analysis. The two studies that analyzed surgical site infections reported no infections in either arm; therefore, we could not answer the question of whether adhesive drapes affect risk of surgical site infection. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review suggest that adhesive drapes, including those with antimicrobial properties, decrease the risk of wound contamination during orthopaedic procedures. In circumstances where drape adhesion is compromised and peel back occurs at the wound edge, there is an increased risk of wound contamination with the use of adhesive drapes. The best currently available evidence is indeterminate as to the effect of adhesive drapes on the risk of surgical site infections; however, if used, care should be taken to avoid or minimize drape peel back. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Comparative Efficacy of Nonoperative Treatments for Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: An evolved understanding of the pathophysiology of greater trochanteric pain syndrome has led to a number of proposed nonoperative management strategies. The objective of this review was to compare the efficacy of the various nonoperative treatments for greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS). DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. SETTING: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were searched to January 2020. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing nonoperative treatment for GTPS. INTERVENTIONS: Nonoperative treatment strategies for GTPS including injections of corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid, dry needling, and structured exercise programs and extracorporeal shockwave therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain and functional outcomes. Bayesian random-effects model was performed to assess the direct and indirect comparison of all treatment options. RESULTS: Thirteen randomized controlled trials and 1034 patients were included. For pain scores at 1 to 3 months follow-up, both platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and shockwave therapy demonstrated significantly better pain scores compared with the no treatment control group with PRP having the highest probability of being the best treatment at both 1 to 3 months and 6 to 12 months. No proposed therapies significantly outperformed the no treatment control group for pain scores at 6 to 12 months. Structured exercise had the highest probability of being the best treatment for improvements in functional outcomes and was the only treatment that significantly improved functional outcome scores compared with the no treatment arm at 1 to 3 months. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that PRP and shockwave therapy may provide short-term (1-3 months) pain relief, and structured exercise leads to short-term (1-3 months) improvements in functional outcomes.

Are Functional Outcomes of a Total Hip Arthroplasty Predictive of a Contralateral Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Current literature suggests that 8%-35% of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) undergo a subsequent contralateral THA. This study aims to determine if functional outcomes after primary THA predict outcomes in the subsequent primary THA of the contralateral side. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients undergoing staged bilateral primary THA was reviewed. The Oxford Hip Score (OHS) was utilized as the functional outcome measurement tool and was assessed preoperatively and at one year postoperatively. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was assessed. Based on the first-side THA one-year outcomes, the odds of maintaining an MCID, or not, for the second-side THA were determined. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 551 patients and 1102 primary THAs. The average postoperative OHSs were similar after the first and second THA. Patients achieving the MCID with the first-side surgery were 2.6 times (95% confidence interval 1.0 to 6.64, P = .04) more likely to achieve the MCID for the second-side surgery than patients failing to reach the MCID for their first-side surgery. After the first THA, 29 (5.3%) patients failed to reach the predefined MCID for the OHS compared with 54 (9.8%) patients undergoing their second THA (odds ratio: 1.96 [95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 3.1], χ2 = 8.14, P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcomes after the first THA are predictive of functional outcomes of the second THA. Patients are more likely to achieve a clinically significant improvement after their first THA related to higher preoperative OHSs before the second THA.

The Use of Rifampin in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Rifampin is an antibiotic with the ability to penetrate bacterial biofilms, and thus has been considered as a potentially important adjunct in the prevention and treatment of PJI. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize the use of rifampin in TJA, particularly in the context of PJI. METHODS: A literature search of all relevant electronic databases was performed. All comparative studies assessing the use of rifampin in the context of TJA were included. Descriptive data are reported, and a meta-analysis was performed using all studies which compared the addition of rifampin to standard care in treating PJI. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of 22 studies comparing the addition of rifampin to standard care for treating PJI found a significant reduction in failure rates (26.0% vs 35.9%; odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.86). The protective effect of rifampin was maintained in studies which included exchange arthroplasty as a treatment strategy, but not in studies only using an implant retention strategy. Among studies reporting adverse events of rifampin, there was a 20.5% adverse event rate. CONCLUSION: Overall, rifampin appears to confer a protective effect against treatment failure following PJI. This treatment effect is particularly pronounced in the context of exchange arthroplasty. Further high-level evidence is needed to clarify the exact indications and doses of rifampin which can most effectively act as an adjunct in the treatment of PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Level I-III Studies.

Effect of a Postoperative Multimodal Opioid-Sparing Protocol vs Standard Opioid Prescribing on Postoperative Opioid Consumption After Knee or Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery, there is growing evidence that opioid-sparing protocols may reduce postoperative opioid consumption while adequately addressing patients' pain. However, there are a lack of prospective, comparative trials evaluating their effectiveness. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a multimodal, opioid-sparing approach to postoperative pain management compared with the current standard of care in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was performed at 3 clinical sites in Ontario, Canada, and enrolled 200 patients from March 2021 to March 2022 with final follow-up completed in April 2022. Adult patients undergoing outpatient arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery were followed up for 6 weeks postoperatively. Interventions: The opioid-sparing group (100 participants randomized) received a prescription of naproxen, acetaminophen (paracetamol), and pantoprazole; a limited rescue prescription of hydromorphone; and a patient educational infographic. The control group (100 participants randomized) received the current standard of care determined by the treating surgeon, which consisted of an opioid analgesic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was postoperative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption at 6 weeks after surgery. There were 5 secondary outcomes, including pain, patient satisfaction, opioid refills, quantity of OMEs prescribed at the time of hospital discharge, and adverse events at 6 weeks all reported at 6 weeks after surgery. Results: Among the 200 patients who were randomized (mean age, 43 years; 73 women [38%]), 193 patients (97%) completed the trial; 98 of whom were randomized to receive standard care and 95 the opioid-sparing protocol. Patients in the opioid-sparing protocol consumed significantly fewer opioids (median, 0 mg; IQR, 0-8.0 mg) than patients in the control group (median, 40.0 mg; IQR, 7.5-105.0; z = -6.55; P < .001). Of the 5 prespecified secondary end points, 4 showed no significant difference. The mean amount of OMEs prescribed was 341.2 mg (95% CI, 310.2-372.2) in the standard care group and 40.4 mg (95% CI, 39.6-41.2) in the opioid-sparing group (mean difference, 300.8 mg; 95% CI, 269.4-332.3; P < .001). There was no significant difference in adverse events at 6 weeks (2 events [2.1%] in the standard care group vs 3 events [3.2%] in the opioid-sparing group), but more patients reported medication-related adverse effects in the standard care group (32% vs 19%, P = .048). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients who underwent arthroscopic knee or shoulder surgery, a multimodal opioid-sparing postoperative pain management protocol, compared with standard opioid prescribing, significantly reduced postoperative opioid consumption over 6 weeks. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04566250.

Short-term outcomes vary by surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The direct anterior approach (DAA) has increased in popularity in recent years. Proponents cite its muscle-sparing approach and purported reduction in pain and improvement in function when compared to the traditional surgical approaches. There remains controversy surrounding the validity of these claims. The objective of this study was to compare the common total hip surgical approaches in terms of pain scores, functional outcomes, opioid use and complications within the first 12 weeks postoperatively. METHODS: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing postoperative outcomes of different surgical approaches in primary THA up to 12 weeks was performed. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and SCOPUS were systematically searched from inception to May 2020. Outcomes included pain scores, functional outcome scores, length of stay (LOS), complications and opioid consumption. RESULTS: Twenty-five RCTs (n = 2339) were included. The DAA demonstrated statistically significant improvement in Harris Hip Scores at 6 weeks when compared to the posterior and direct lateral approaches. The DAA reduced pain scores on postoperative day 2 and at 2 weeks compared to the direct lateral approach. The anterolateral approach was found to have a significantly shorter LOS compared to the other major surgical approaches. The differences in functional outcomes or pain scores did not surpass conventional cutoffs for a minimal clinically important difference. CONCLUSION: The DAA led to functional improvements at 6 weeks compared to the posterior and direct lateral approaches and reduced postoperative pain compared to the direct lateral approach. However, these improvements failed to reach clinical significance. All major surgical approaches led to large improvements in function by 12 weeks with relatively low complication rates. Whether a short-term statistically significant improvement in function is sufficiently patient important to recommend DAA as a standard remains uncertain.

Intra-articular saline injection is as effective as corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for hip osteoarthritis pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Intra-articular (IA) injections represent a commonly used modality in the treatment of hip osteoarthritis (OA). Commonly used injections include corticosteroids (CCS), hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). A network meta-analysis allows for comparison among more than two treatment arms and uses both direct and indirect comparisons between interventions. The objective of this network meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of the various IA injectable treatments in treating hip OA at up to 6 months of follow-up. DESIGN: This is a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Bayesian random-effects model was performed to assess the direct and indirect comparisons of all treatment options. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus and Web of Science, from inception to October 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTED STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of CCS, HA, PRP and placebo in the form of IA saline injection for patients with hip OA. RESULTS: Eleven randomised controlled trials comprising 1353 patients were included. For pain outcomes at both 2-4 and 6 months, no intervention significantly outperformed placebo IA injection. For functional outcomes at both 2-4 and 6 months, no intervention significantly outperformed placebo IA injection. Regarding change from baseline at 2-4 months and 6 months, pooled data demonstrated that all interventions (including placebo), with the exception of HA+PRP, led to a clinically important improvement in both pain, exceeding the minimal clinically important difference. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that IA hip saline injections performed as well as all other injectable options in the management of hip pain and functional outcomes.

Perioperative nonopioid analgesia reduces postoperative opioid consumption in knee arthroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The opioid epidemic has prompted an emphasis on investigating opioid-sparing alternatives for pain management following knee arthroscopy. This review evaluated the effects of perioperative nonopioid adjunct analgesia on postoperative opioid consumption and pain control in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS. Prospective comparative studies assessing the efficacy of various perioperative nonopioid analgesic strategies in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy were included. Twenty-five studies (n = 2408) were included. RESULTS: Pre-emptive nonopioid pain medications demonstrated a reduction in cumulative postoperative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption by 11.8 mg (95% CI - 18.3, - 5.4, p ≤ 0.0001) and VAS pain scores by 1.5 (95% CI - 2.3, - 0.7, p < 0.001) at 24 h compared to placebo. Postoperative nonopioid pain medications significantly reduced cumulative postoperative OME consumption by 9.7 mg (95% CI - 14.4, - 5.1, p < 0.001) and VAS pain scores by 1.0 (95% CI - 1.354, - 0.633, p < 0.001) at 24 h compared to placebo. Saphenous nerve blocks significantly reduced cumulative postoperative OME consumption by 6.5 mg (95% CI - 10.3, - 2.6, p = 0.01) and VAS pain scores by 0.8 (- 1.4, - 0.3, p = 0.03) at 24 h compared to placebo. Both preoperative patient education and postoperative cryotherapy reduced postoperative opioid consumption. CONCLUSION: Perioperative nonopioid pharmacotherapy, saphenous nerve blocks, and cryotherapy for patients undergoing knee arthroscopy significantly reduce opioid consumption and pain scores when compared to placebo at 24 h postoperatively. These interventions should be considered in efforts to reduce opioid consumption in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. More research is needed to determine which interventions can reduce pain outside of the immediate postoperative period and the potential synergistic effects of combining interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Safety and early results of Subchondroplasty® for the treatment of bone marrow lesions in osteoarthritis: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Subchondroplasty® is a novel minimally invasive procedure for painful subchondral bone marrow lesions (BMLs). The aim of this systematic review was to characterize the clinical outcomes of the Subchondroplasty® procedure, a novel minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of BMLs. The hypothesis tested was that patients experience improvements in pain and functional outcomes following the Subchondroplasty® procedure. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from database inception to search date (June 10, 2020) for all clinical studies which discussed Subchondroplasty®. Two reviewers independently screened 45 unique results and 17 studies were included in the final analysis. Data were collected regarding patient demographics, indications, pain, functional scores, conversion to TKA, and complications of the procedure. RESULTS: All but one study were level IV evidence; the mean MINORS score was 9 ± 2. There were 756 patients included, 45.1% were female, and the mean age was 54 years (range 20-85). Thirteen studies investigated the effect Subchondroplasty® to the knee, while four studied the impact on the foot and ankle. Median length of follow-up was 12 months. The most common indication for Subchondroplasty® was joint pain with corresponding BML. Major contraindications to Subchondroplasty® included severe OA, joint instability, and malalignment. Mean pain score on visual analogue scale (VAS) prior to Subchondroplasty® was 7.8 ± 0.6, but decreased to 3.4 ± 0.7 postoperatively. All studies investigating functional scores reported improvement following Subchondroplasty® (IKDC 31.7 ± 1.9-54.0 ± 4.2 and KOOS 38.1 ± 0.6-70.0 ± 4.1). There were consistently high levels of patient satisfaction; 87 ± 8% of patients would be willing to undergo the procedure again. Seven cases of complications were reported, most seriously osteomyelitis and avascular necrosis. Conversion to knee arthroplasty ranged from 12.5 to 30% with length of follow-up ranging from 10 months to 7 years. CONCLUSIONS: Existing low-quality studies show Subchondroplasty® to benefit patients with BMLs through reduction in pain and improvement in function, along with a high degree of satisfaction following the procedure. The low short-to-medium term conversion rate to arthroplasty suggests that Subchondroplasty® may play a role in delaying more invasive and expensive procedures in patients with BMLs. Subchondroplasty® is a novel procedure that has promising initial findings, but requires further high-quality, comparative studies with long-term follow-up to better understand the outcomes of the procedure and impact clinical practice recommendations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review of Level III and IV Studies, Level IV.

The Fragility of Statistically Significant Findings From Randomized Controlled Trials in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The Fragility Index (FI) is a method for evaluating the robustness of statistically significant findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) beyond the P value in trials with dichotomous outcomes. The FI is defined as the number of patients in one arm of a trial that would have to have a different outcome to change the results of the trial from statistically significant to nonsignificant. This review assessed the FI in arthroplasty RCTs. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science for RCTs related to primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) from 2010 to 2020. Trials with a statistically significant dichotomous primary outcome were included. The FI was calculated using Fisher's exact test to determine how many events would need to be reversed to change a study from statistically significant to nonsignificant. RESULTS: A total of 34 RCTs were included. The median sample size was 103 patients (range 24-791). The median FI was 1 (range 0-45), meaning that reversing the outcome of just one patient in either treatment group of each trial would change it from a significant to a nonsignificant result. CONCLUSION: Hip and knee arthroplasty RCTs with statistically significant dichotomous outcomes in TJA are fragile. The median FI in TJA is lower than the FI in any of the other previously reported orthopedic subspecialties. Fragility is another reason to be cautious when conducting or interpreting small trials, and to continue to strive toward large trials to answer important questions in TJA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Quantifying the Level of Evidence of Podium Presentations at the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons From 2015 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: The American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) Annual Scientific Meeting is a leading forum for the presentation and dissemination of research regarding the management of hip and knee pathology making research presented at these meetings a representation of the current literature in the field. The purpose of this study was to quantify the level of evidence of podium presentations presented at the AAHKS annual meeting from 2015 to 2019. METHODS: Two reviewers evaluated the abstracts for the available presentations. Basic science and biomechanical studies were excluded from the review. Economic studies that were not able to be evaluated based on the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeon guidelines were also excluded. The two reviewers then independently evaluated each abstract and assigned a level of evidence (level I-V) based on the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeon classification scheme. RESULTS: A total of 258 podium presentations were included. In total, 17 (7%) abstracts were graded level I evidence, 57 (22%) were graded level II, 85 (33%) were graded level III, and 98 (38%) were graded level IV (Table 1). There was a significant change in the distribution of the level of evidence of podium presentations over time (χ2 = 24.6, P = .02). The proportion of level I studies has increased between 2015 and 2019 (from 3.9% to 11.8%) with a concomitant decrease in level IV studies (from 42.3% to 21.6%) over that time period. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a significant improvement in the levels of evidence of podium presentations at the AAHKS Annual Meeting from 2015 to 2019.

The Changing Characteristics of Arthroplasty Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is among the most common operations performed worldwide, with global volumes on the rise. It is important to understand if the characteristics of this patient population are changing over time for resource allocation and surgical planning. The purpose of this study is to examine how this patient population has changed between 2003 and 2017. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective TJA database was conducted. Age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, responsible diagnoses, and comorbidities were compared over 5-year intervals between 2003 and 2017. All patients undergoing primary, elective TJA were included. RESULTS: Overall, 17,138 TJAs were included. Mean body mass index increased over the study period for total hip arthroplasty (THA; 29.4-30.4 kg/m2, P < .0001) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA; 32.0-3.1 kg/m2, P < .0001) patients. THA patients were significantly younger in more recent years (68.0-66.8 years old, P = .0026); this trend was not observed among TKA patients. Over the study period, a significantly higher proportion of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class III/IV for THA (50.5%-72.3%) and TKA (57.5%-80.7%) (P < .00001). Prevalence of common comorbidities did not change significantly. CONCLUSION: The key findings of this retrospective analysis of a large prospective database are that patients undergoing TJA are becoming younger and more obese. It is unclear whether patients are becoming more medically complex. These trends paint a concerning picture of a population that is increasingly complex, and may require a greater allocation of resources in the future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

The learning curve for the direct anterior total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a muscle-sparing approach thought to have less post-operative pain and quicker recovery, with similar functional outcomes to other approaches. However, it is technically challenging and transitioning surgeons may experience increased complication rates. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify reported learning curves associated with the DAA. METHODS: Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science) were searched using terms including "total hip arthroplasty," "direct anterior approach," and "learning curve." Study characteristics, patient demographics, learning curve analyses, and complications were abstracted. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 9738 patients (60% female), an average age of 63.7 years (range: 13-94), body mass index of 27.0 kg/m2 (range: 16.8-58.9), and follow-up of 19 months (range: 1.5-100). There were five retrospective cohort studies and 13 case series representing fair methodological quality. Six studies depicted a true learning curve, with mean operative time of 156.59 ± 41.71 minutes for the first case, 93.18 ± 14.68 minutes by case 30, and 80.45 ± 12.28 minutes by case 100. Mean complication rate was 20.8 ± 12.7% in early groups and decreased to 7.6 ± 7.1% in late groups. CONCLUSION: This review demonstrated a substantial learning curve associated with the DAA to THA. Operative time plateaued after approximately 100 cases. Complication rates decreased substantially from early to late groups.

Local antibiotics in primary hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Infection is a truly devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty, causing most patients to undergo a revision surgery, and to bear significant psychological and financial burden. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate the literature to determine the efficacy and complication profile of local antibiotic application in primary total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: All studies of primary total joint arthroplasty which assessed local antibiotics in any form other than antibiotic-impregnated cement as an intervention were included. Studies that reported at least one outcome related to infection and were available in full text in English were eligible for inclusion. Studies which included both primary and revision cases but did not report the stratified data for each type of surgery and studies on fracture populations were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies involving 3,714 cases were included. The pooled deep infection rate was 1.6% in the intervention groups and 3.5% in the control groups. Meta-analysis revealed a RR of 0.53 (95%CI: 0.35-0.79, p = 0.002) with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) for infection in the intervention groups. Meta-analysis revealed a non-significant reduction in superficial infection rates in the intervention groups; however, there was a significant increase in aseptic wound complications in the intervention groups. CONCLUSION: Local antibiotic application results in a moderate reduction in deep infection rates in primary total joint arthroplasty, with no significant impact on superficial infection rates. However, local antibiotic application may be associated with a moderate increase in aseptic wound complications.

What Is the Best Evidence for Management of Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fractures? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of 22 Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Displaced mid-third clavicle fractures are common, and their management remains unclear. Although several meta-analyses have compared specific operative techniques with nonoperative management, it is not possible to compare different operative constructs with one another using a standard meta-analysis. Conversely, a network meta-analysis allows comparisons among more than two treatment arms, using both direct and indirect comparisons between interventions across many trials. To our knowledge, no network meta-analysis has been performed to compare the multiple treatment options for displaced clavicle fractures. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) to determine from among the approaches used to treat displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: (1) the intervention with the highest chance of union at 1 year, (2) the intervention with the lowest risk of revision surgery, and (3) the intervention with the highest functional outcome scores. Secondarily, we also (4) compared the surgical subtypes in the available RCTs on the same above endpoints. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were reviewed for relevant randomized controlled trials published up to July 25, 2018. Two hundred and eighty four papers were reviewed, with 22 meeting inclusion criteria of RCTs with appropriate randomization techniques, adult population, minimum of 1 year follow-up and including at least one operative treatment arm. In total, 1002 patients were treated with a plate construct, 378 with an intramedullary device, and 585 patients were managed nonoperatively. Treatment subtypes included locked intramedullary devices (56), unlocked intramedullary devices (322), anterior plating (89), anterosuperior plating (150), superior plating (449) or plating not otherwise specified (314). We performed a network meta-analysis to compare and rank the treatments for displaced clavicle fractures. We considered the following outcomes: union achievement, revision surgery risk and functional outcomes (DASH and Constant Scores). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was considered for both Constant and DASH scores to be at 8 points, representing the average of MCID scores reported for both DASH and Constant in the evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Union achievement was lower in patients treated nonoperatively (88.9%), and higher in patients treated operatively (96.7%, relative risk [RR] 1.128 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.17]; p < 0.001), Number needed to treat (NNT) = 10). Union achievement increased with any plate construct (97.8%, RR 1.13 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.7]; p < 0.0001, NNT = 9) and with anterior or anterosuperior plates (99.3%, RR 1.14 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.8]; p < 0.0001, NNT = 8). Risk of reoperation, when considering planned removal of hardware, was similar across all treatment arms. Lastly, operative treatment outperformed nonoperative treatment with minor improvements in DASH and Constant scores, though not approaching the MCID. At the subtype level, anterosuperior plating ranked highest in DASH and Constant functional scores with mean differences reaching 10-point improvement for Constant scores (95% CI 4.4 to 2.5) and 7.6 point improvement for DASH (95% CI 5.2 to 20). CONCLUSIONS: We found that surgical treatment led to a greater likelihood of union at 1 year of follow-up among adult patients with displaced mid-third clavicle fractures. In aggregate, surgical treatment did not increase functional scores by amounts that patients were likely to consider clinically important. Use of specific subtypes of plating (anterior, anterosuperior) resulted in improvements in the Constant score that were slightly above the MCID but did not reach the MCID for the DASH score, suggesting that any outcomes-score benefits favoring surgery were likely to be imperceptible or small. In light of these findings, we believe patients can be informed that surgery for this injury can increase the likelihood of union incrementally (about 10 patients would need to undergo surgery to avoid one nonunion), but they should not expect better function than they would achieve without surgery; most patients can avoid surgery altogether with little absolute risk of nonunion. Patients who opt for surgery must be told that the decision should be weighed against complications and the possibility of undergoing a second procedure for hardware removal. Patients opting not to have surgery for acute midshaft clavicle fractures can be told that nonunion occurs in slightly more than 10% of patients, and that these can be more difficult to manage than acute fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.