Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Despite theoretical risks of fatigue wear, there is little empirical evidence correlating postoperative impact level from physical activity with failure rates following total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA). This study aimed to assess the relationship between the impact level from self-reported sports and physical activity participation and revision rates following primary arthroplasty. METHODS:A survey was conducted on recreational sports participation among primary elective THA and TKA patients from an urban, academic health system between June 1, 2011, and January 31, 2022. A total of 1,622 THA and 1,388 TKA respondents were included in the study. The survey was administered cross-sectionally at various time points, with a minimum follow-up of at least one year required for inclusion (THA, 5.3 years; TKA, 4.8 years postoperation on average). Patients were divided into four cohorts based on participation and intensity of the sport: no sports, low-impact sports, intermediate-impact sports, and high-impact sports. Descriptive comparisons were made to evaluate revision rates and mean time to follow-up among these groups in THA and TKA patients. The Kaplan-Meier method was utilized to assess 10-year implant survivability. RESULTS:Healthier and younger patients who underwent THA or TKA were significantly more likely to participate in intermediate- to high-impact sports and were found to have noninferior revision rates than those who engaged in no sports or low-impact sports: THA (2.9 [no sports] versus 1.9 [low impact] versus 1.6% [intermediate/high impact]), TKA (3.0 versus 1.6 versus 0.0%). When analyzing aseptic versus septic revisions separately, no notable patterns or differences were observed. CONCLUSIONS:At a mean 5-year follow-up, healthier and younger patients who participated in intermediate- and high-impact physical activities had noninferior revision rates as than patients who were less active. These findings offer guidance for clinicians when advising patients on the safe resumption of sports activities following total joint arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND:Return to sports is a concern for many patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). As younger, active patients increasingly undergo THA, identifying factors that influence athletic recovery is critical. Although prior work has reported favorable outcomes, large-scale studies comparing return rates across both surgical approaches and sport types remain limited. METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed 1,115 athletically participant THA patients and compared rates of returning to sports up to one year postoperatively. Survey data captured sport type, participation at four time points, frequency, exertion, and perceived recovery. Patients were stratified by surgical approach: posterior (PA) (n = 519), anterior (AA) (n = 556), and lateral (LA) (n = 50). RESULTS:Preoperatively, 45.2% of patients were active in at least one sport versus 43.7% at one year postoperatively; 73.2% of preoperative athletes returned, and 23.3% of those previously inactive took up sports. Return-to-sport rates were 68.1, 77.0, and 81.8% for PA, AA, and LA, respectively (Chi-square = 3.42, P = 0.181). There were no significant differences between AA and PA, and the lateral approach was not statistically comparable due to a smaller sample size. Low-impact sports had significantly higher return rates than high-impact sports (72.4 versus 50.0%; P < 0.001). At survey completion (> one year postoperatively), satisfaction rates were high across all sports, and activity restrictions were reported by about one in five patients, regardless of approach. Sport-specific outcomes showed that most patients maintained or improved performance. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing THA can expect high return rates and satisfaction with athletic endeavors. Surgical approach generally does not affect return-to-sport outcomes after THA. Most patients, regardless of approach, resumed or exceeded preoperative activity. In addition to high return rates among previously active patients, many previously inactive patients participated in sports after THA, highlighting the role of THA in enabling sport resumption and participation.

BACKGROUND:Patients who undergo primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may return to work at variable times following surgery, the timeline for which is partly affected by the physical intensity of their occupation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction and limitations when returning to work following TKA. METHODS:This retrospective review surveyed patients undergoing primary TKA between June 2011 and January 2022, with at least 1 year of follow up, regarding return to work. Of the 914 respondents, 507 (55.5 %) worked preoperatively and were stratified into high intensity (HI) (i.e., laborer, construction), standard intensity (SI) (i.e., walking, climbing stairs), or low intensity (LI) (i.e., sedentary desk jobs) groups. Baseline characteristics and survey responses were compared across groups. Among those who worked preoperatively, 35 (6.9 %), 213 (42 %), and 259 (51.1 %) were in the HI, SI, and LI groups, respectively. RESULTS:Of the 507 patients who worked prior to TKA, 447 (88.2 %) returned to work after surgery and 60 (11.8 %) did not. The HI group was comprised of more young males and more smokers than the SI and LI groups. In the LI group, 30 % returned within 1 month following surgery and an additional 44 % within 2 months. Similarly in the SI group, 11 % returned to work in less than 1 month with an additional 39 % returning within 2 months. In the HI group, 4 % returned within the first month and additional 42 % returned within 2 months. HI workers were more commonly hindered in their return (HI: 30.8 %, SI: 23.1 %, LI: 7.7 %), 'moderately declined' in their work ability (HI: 23.1 %, SI: 9.7 %, 3.0 %), and 'very unsatisfied' with their return (HI: 11.5 %, SI: 10.8 %, LI: 8.1 %). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:TKA leads to improvements in work function and satisfaction across all intensity levels, but HI work is associated with longer recovery times and comparatively lower return-to-work satisfaction compared to SI and LI groups.

BACKGROUND:10 years after changing our institution's total hip arthroplasty (THA) preoperative antibiotic prophylactic protocol by adding gram-negative (GN) coverage, this study aimed to assess the impact of adding GN specific coverage (GNSC) prior to THA on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. METHODS:This was a retrospective case-control study of 14,598 patients who underwent primary, elective THA between July 2012 and January 2022, with minimum 1-year follow-up. All patients were under perioperative antibiotic protocol that included GNSC with either weight-based gentamicin or aztreonam (+GNSC) and were compared to a historical control group of patients for which the antibiotic prophylactic protocol did not include GNSC (-GNSC). PJI and nephrotoxicity rates, as well as the severity of nephrotoxicity according to the RIFLE criteria, were compared between the study populations and 4122 controls. RESULTS: = 0.567), which are the two more severe forms of nephrotoxicity, were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS:The addition of gentamicin or aztreonam prior to THA reduces the incidence of GN-related PJIs. Increased nephrotoxicity rates were limited to the mildest form, usually associated with reversibility and favourable outcomes.

(1) Introduction: Precise femoral component rotation is critical for achieving symmetric flexion-gap balance and physiologic patellofemoral tracking in mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Surgeons often infer an appropriate rotational target from the patient's coronal limb alignment, yet the strength of this relationship remains uncertain. (2) Methods: We identified 695 consecutive patients undergoing primary TKA with a preoperative planning CT scan. The surgical transepicondylar axis (sTEA) and posterior condylar axis (PCAxis) were identified and the angle between them was measured. The angle between the mechanical axis of the femur and tibia was used to measure the coronal alignment of the limb. (3) Results: The mean sTEA was 3.0° externally rotated to the PCAxis (range 3.1° internal to 9.2° external). The mean coronal alignment was 4.3° varus (range -12.5° valgus to 24.5° varus). There were 465 patients with >2° varus and 101 patients with >2° valgus. The mean sTEA was 2.9 ± 1.9° externally rotated relative to the PCAxis in the valgus group and 2.8 ± 2.0° in the varus group, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.7). (4) Conclusions: There is significant variation in the femoral rotation axes between patients, but no significant relationship between overall limb coronal alignment and the magnitude of femoral rotation axes variation. This reinforces the need for independent assessment of rotational landmarks when performing mechanically aligned TKA.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Technology is increasingly incorporated into unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) through computer-assisted navigation (N-UKA) and robot-assisted surgery (R-UKA) to improve alignment, implant positioning, and gap balancing. Whether intraoperative technology helps achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) compared to conventional UKA (C-UKA) remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to assess whether differences in PROMs between C-UKA and technology-assisted UKA reached MCID values. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:PubMed/MEDLINE/Cochrane Library were reviewed for studies comparing PROMs between primary C-UKA (control group) and N-UKA or R-UKA. Delta improvements were compared to established MCID values. Additional radiographic and clinical differences were assessed. The review yielded four (N=328) N-UKA and seven (N=526) R-UKA studies with C-UKA cohorts as controls. RESULTS:Differences in preoperative and postoperative PROMs were reported as statistically significant in three of four studies (75%) comparing N-UKA and C-UKA; however, none of the studies reported values that reached the MCID. Differences in preoperative and postoperative PROMs were reported as statistically significant in four of seven studies (57.1%) comparing R-UKA and C-UKA; however, only three of the studies (42.9%) reported values that reached the MCID. Improved radiographic outcomes for N-UKA and R-UKA were reported in 75% and 57.1% of studies, respectively. Only one study reported improved revision rates with R-UKA compared to C-UKA. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Though studies may report better improvements in PROMs in N-UKA and R-UKA compared to C-UKA, these often may not achieve clinical significance. Future studies should present outcome differences in the context of validated MCID as well as other metrics such as revision rates and radiographic outliers as the impetus for technology-assisted UKA.

BACKGROUND:Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has recently regained popularity, yet data has raised concerns about rates of arthrofibrosis following these procedures. The purpose of this study was to utilize the American Joint Replacement Registry to compare rates of early manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) in cementless and cemented primary TKAs that use technology or manual instrumentation. METHODS:We queried the American Joint Replacement Registry for all patients ages 18 to 95 years who underwent cemented or cementless primary TKA over a 7-year period. Patients were stratified based on whether technology (robotics or computer-assisted navigation) was used during the primary surgery. Groups were then compared for rates of MUA within 90-day of the index surgery using multivariable logistic regression models. A total of 340,841 cases were included in the study, 78,397 (23%) of which used technology and 262,444 (77%) which did not. Within the technology cohort, there were 51,500 (65%) robotic and 26,897 (35%) navigated cases. There were 65% of technology-assisted TKAs and 92% of manual TKAs cemented. RESULTS:In the technology group, multivariable analysis demonstrated significantly higher odds of MUA in cemented TKAs compared to cementless (odds ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.06 to 3.59]; P = 0.031). Robotic cases had significantly higher odds of MUA with cemented compared to cementless implants (OR 2.38, 95% CI [1.27 to 4.46]; P = 0.007), while there was no difference in MUA related to cementation in the navigated cases (OR 3.53, 95% CI [0.48 to 25.95]; P = 0.22). In the manual group, there were no significant differences in MUA rates related to cementation use (OR 1.14, 95% CI [0.8 to 1.64]; P = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS:Cementless TKA did not increase odds of MUA. In further analyzing cement use into technology and manual cohorts, robotic-assisted cemented TKAs had higher rates of early MUA than cementless. Identification of risk factors leading to early arthrofibrosis may be patient dependent and further study is required to elucidate any surgical considerations.