Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Weight management strategies before total hip arthroplasty (THA) include bariatric surgery and Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, including semaglutide. Previous studies have reported higher THA implant failure in patients who had prior bariatric surgery. This study aimed to evaluate semaglutide as a weight management alternative for patients undergoing THA and any effects on perioperative outcomes. METHODS:A retrospective review of primary, elective THAs performed between 2012 and 2024 was conducted at a single, urban, academic center. The study identified 224 patients who had a history of bariatric surgery, 202 patients who had perioperative semaglutide use, and a control group of 2,991 patients who had a body mass index (BMI) > 35. Demographic variables and clinical outcomes were compared between cohorts. RESULTS:The bariatric patients were younger (57 versus 61, P = 0.012) and more often women (65.6 versus 57.4 versus 55.4%, P < 0.001) than semaglutide and control patients. Preoperative hemoglobin A1c was lowest in semaglutide patients (6.2 versus 5.7 versus 5.8%, P < 0.001). The changes in BMI varied across groups one year before and after THA (P < 0.001). The bariatric and semaglutide groups decreased their BMI by 1.4 and 0.8, respectively, and control patients increased by 0.4. Implant survivorship was 95.5% at 10 years. There was no correlation found between any cohort and 90-day emergency department visits, readmissions, and all-time revision. Higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class and Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5 conferred increased complications. CONCLUSIONS:Semaglutide appears to be a safe alternative to bariatric surgery for weight management before THA, with similar implant survival and postoperative complication rates. Further studies are warranted to understand outcomes for THA patients who use semaglutide.

BACKGROUND:The increasing prevalence of chronic antithrombotic medication use among aging and medically complex total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients poses major challenges, requiring a careful balance of thrombotic and bleeding risks. METHODS:This review aimed to summarize existing guidelines and supporting literature surrounding the perioperative management of chronic antithrombotics in patients undergoing TJA and identify remaining gaps and challenges to guide future research efforts. RESULTS:Current guidelines strongly recommend continuing aspirin throughout the perioperative period for TJA patients while advising the cessation of P2Y12 inhibitors and anticoagulants preoperatively, with specific timing dependent on patient- and procedure-related risks. There remains a critical gap in high-quality evidence and standardized guidelines regarding optimal postoperative resumption of chronic antithrombotics, leading to wide variability in practices and reliance on surgeon judgment. CONCLUSIONS:Future research efforts should prioritize developing evidence-based perioperative protocols tailored specifically for TJA patients on chronic antithrombotic therapy, similar to existing multidisciplinary guidelines for immunosuppressive management.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Press-fit acetabular components achieve long-term fixation through osseointegration, yet the extent of bone ingrowth necessary for durable stability in well-functioning implants remains unclear. Postmortem retrievals provide a unique opportunity to directly assess the bone-cup interface in clinically successful total hip arthroplasties (THAs). This study evaluated osseointegration and biomechanical fixation strength in deceased-donor acetabular components to better define the characteristics of stable long-term fixation. METHODS:Cadaver pelvis specimens containing uncemented THAs from a single institution were evaluated. There were 29 acetabular components that underwent axial pull-out testing using a universal testing machine. A total of seven of these were additionally processed for histologic evaluation, including dehydration, acrylic embedding, thin-sectioning, staining, and digital imaging. Osseointegration was quantified by bone-area fraction occupancy (%BAFO), representing the proportion of bone occupying the porous thread spaces of the cup. RESULTS:All 29 specimens failed through fracture of the ilium rather than at the bone-cup interface, indicating that the mechanical integrity of the osseointegrated construct exceeded that of the surrounding bone under axial tension. Among the seven histologically analyzed components, %BAFO ranged from 4.2 to 27.0% (mean 15.1%), despite all implants being clinically stable at the time of death. There were no significant linear correlations observed between %BAFO and time implanted, fracture load, or body mass index. A significant quadratic relationship between %BAFO and age was identified, peaking near 81 years. CONCLUSIONS:Cementless acetabular components exhibited strong fixation despite modest osseointegration, with failure occurring through host bone on axial testing. Durable biological fixation appears achievable with limited, but mechanically favorable bone ingrowth.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Given the severe morbidity, mortality, and substantial cost of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), substantial research has been conducted to compare peri- and postoperative infection-prevention strategies. To our knowledge, there are no studies to date that have evaluated the one-year efficacy of intraoperative vancomycin powder and/or dilute povidone-iodine (DPI) lavage versus saline lavage in total joint arthroplasty. We previously reported no significant group differences at three months in a large multicenter randomized controlled trial. The present study reports 1-year outcomes of the same cohort. METHODS:In this prospective, multicenter trial, 2,053 high-risk patients undergoing primary, unilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were randomized to one of four intraoperative protocols: vancomycin powder, DPI, VPIP (combination), or saline lavage control. The primary outcome was 1-year PJI resulting in septic revision surgery. Analyses were conducted on a per-protocol basis using Chi-square tests stratified by procedure. At one year, complete follow-up was available for 798 THA and 1,032 TKA patients after accounting for withdrawals, loss to follow-up, and nine unrelated deaths. RESULTS:In the THA cohort, PJI occurred in 0.5% of vancomycin patients, 1.7% of iodine patients, 1.9% of VPIP patients, and 1.1% of saline patients (P = 0.62). In the TKA cohort, PJI occurred in 1.6% of vancomycin patients, none of the iodine patients, 2.0% of VPIP patients, and 0.4% of saline patients (P = 0.05). There were no significant differences between study groups at zero to three months (P = 0.14 for THA, P = 0.13 for TKA), three to 12 months (P = 0.67 for THA, P = 0.80 for TKA), or combined zero to 12 months (P = 0.62 for THA, P = 0.05 for TKA). CONCLUSIONS:There were no significant differences in 1-year PJI rates observed across prophylactic strategies in high-risk primary THA or TKA. These findings suggest that intraoperative antiseptic and antibiotic protocols may have limited influence on longer-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND:The impact of postoperative antithrombotic therapy (ATT) on complications such as periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee and hip arthroplasty (TKA and THA, respectively) remains understudied. We aimed to evaluate temporal trends in ATT use and the association between ATT type and PJI following primary TKA and THA. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 20,376 TKA and 16,076 THA patients receiving postoperative ATT between 2013 and 2025. Trends in ATT use were analyzed for all patients, but PJI incidence (2018 International Consensus Meeting definition) was assessed only in patients who had a minimum 90-day follow-up (14,663 TKA; 11,445 THA). Of these, 0.8% and 1.3% developed a PJI, respectively. Multivariate logistic regressions adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, smoking, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index were applied to assess the association between ATT and PJI. RESULTS:From 2013 to 2025, aspirin monotherapy increased to account for the majority of prophylaxis (TKA: 2.0 to 59.4%; THA: 3.1 to 82.2%). In contrast, the use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) declined (TKA: 87.6 to 0.8%; THA: 86.7 to 2.3%), as did warfarin (TKA: 4.1 to 0.3%; THA: 3.4 to 0.9%) and rivaroxaban (TKA: 6.8 to 4.2%; THA: 8.9 to 2.8%). During the same period, apixaban use increased (TKA: 0 to 10.0%; THA: 0 to 12.7%). Aspirin monotherapy was associated with lower odds of PJI compared to non-aspirin regimens (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.81, P = 0.001). Conversely, warfarin (OR 8.01, 95% CI 3.41 to 18.88, P < 0.001) and LMWH (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.64, P < 0.001) were independently associated with increased PJI risk in THA. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Aspirin has become the dominant postoperative ATT agent. In THA, aspirin is associated with a significantly decreased risk of PJI compared to potent anticoagulants like warfarin and LMWH, while no such association was found in the TKA cohort. Surgeons should prioritize aspirin to minimize postoperative infection risk.

BACKGROUND:Complications of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) may require conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA). While well-fixed acetabular components are often retained during conversion, data on implant survival and associated risks are limited. This study evaluated implant-related outcomes, survivorships, and complications in patients who undergo HRA to THA conversion with acetabular component retention. METHODS:A retrospective review of 40 patients having undergone conversion from HRA to THA was conducted. Patients were included if the original HRA acetabular component was retained, provided they had at least one year of clinical follow-up. Demographics, perioperative variables, implant characteristics, and clinical outcomes were collected via chart review. The mean time to conversion was 8.2 years (range, 0.1 to 14.2) with an average of 4.1-years of follow-up (range, 1.0 to 10.9). Common indications for conversion included metallosis (40.0%), mechanical loosening (32.5%), and periprosthetic fracture (22.5%). Most cases (97.5%) were converted to dual-mobility constructs. RESULTS:There were six patients (15.0%) who underwent subsequent reoperation following conversion, including three for infection, one for dislocation, and two for aseptic stem loosening. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated an all-cause revision-free survivorship of 90.0% at one year and 81.2% at 10 years, with aseptic survivorship of 88.5% and acetabular component survivorship of 100% through final follow-up. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Conversion of HRA to THA with retention of a well-fixed acetabular component and conversion to a dual-mobility construct provides durable survivorship up to 10 years (mean follow-up: 4.1 years). However, the rates of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and reoperation are more aligned with those seen in revision THA than primary THA, emphasizing the need for careful patient selection and transparent preoperative counseling. These findings highlight that while this approach can be an effective option for failed hip resurfacing, appropriate caution is warranted to mitigate the elevated risks of infection and reoperation in this cohort.

BACKGROUND:Postoperative improvement in patient-reported outcomes is a key measure of total hip arthroplasty success. The Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) represents the smallest improvement perceived as beneficial. Distribution-based MCIDs have been criticized for producing thresholds smaller than anchor-based values, questioning their clinical relevance. We hypothesized they may capture early biological recovery signals associated with subsequent patient-reported outcomes and aimed to determine whether failure to achieve an early distribution-based MCID (seven to 31 days) was associated with failure to achieve a late anchor-based MCID (90 to 365 days). METHODS:This retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing primary unilateral total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis from January 1, 2021, to January 1, 2025, comprising 844 patients. Patients were included if they completed 'Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement' questionnaires preoperatively, at seven to 31 days, and at 90 to 365 days. Distribution-based MCID was defined as a ≥ 7.8-point improvement, and anchor-based MCID as ≥ 23 points. Multivariable regression assessed associations between early distribution-based and late anchor-based MCID failure, adjusting for demographics and clinical factors. RESULTS:In the early period (seven to 31 days), 565 patients (67.0%) achieved the distribution-based MCID, whereas 573 (67.9%) achieved the late anchor-based MCID (90 to 365 days). Among patients who failed to attain an early distribution-based MCID, 54.1% (151 of 279) also failed the late anchor-based MCID, compared with 21.2% (120 of 565) among early achievers (P < 0.001). Early distribution-based MCID failure was a strong independent predictor of late anchor-based MCID failure (odds ratio: 2.61; 95% confidence interval: 1.85 to 3.68; P < 0.001). Higher baseline Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement scores and facility-based discharge were also independently associated with late failure (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Failure to achieve an early distribution-based MCID is strongly associated with poor patient-reported outcomes up to one year. Early distribution-based MCID attainment may represent an important prognostic marker, enabling timely clinical intervention.

BACKGROUND:Nonmodular dual mobility (DM) articulations in total hip arthroplasty (THA) aim to reduce dislocations through a large outer bearing diameter while minimizing wear via a smaller inner bearing where most motion occurs. Although routine use remains uncommon in the United States, this construct may protect against dislocation. This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes of a cementless, nonmodular DM acetabular cup at a mean follow-up of two years. METHODS:We conducted a single-arm retrospective review of 604 primary, elective THAs using a cementless nonmodular DM acetabular cup between April 2017 and August 2024 at a single health system with at least 90 days of follow-up. All surgeries were performed by a single hip surgeon via posterior approach. Cases were planned using digital templating and performed with manual instruments without enabling technology. Clinical outcomes were collected, including 90-days readmission and revision rates, reasons for readmission and revision, and dislocation rates. RESULTS:At a mean follow-up of 2.0 years (range, 0.25 to 8.0), all-cause and aseptic acetabular cup implant survivorship was 99.8%. There were six revisions during the study period. There was one acetabular component (0.2%) that was revised due to cup dissociation from the pelvis. The remaining revisions included two for periprosthetic femoral fracture (0.3%), one for femoral loosening (0.2%), and two for acute periprosthetic joint infection (0.3%), none of which involved revision of the acetabular cup. There were no dislocations observed, and no patients required revision for instability. CONCLUSIONS:Cementless nonmodular DM acetabular cups offered excellent clinical outcomes in primary THA at a mean follow-up of 2.0 years, with no observed dislocations in 604 cases and high implant survivorship. These findings support the use of nonmodular DM implants as a viable option to achieve THA implant stability and durable fixation even when using a posterior approach without enabling technology.

BACKGROUND:Prolonged retention of antibiotic-loaded articulating spacers after the first stage of a two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can occur because of patient preference, surgeon preference, or medical reasons that prevent the planned second stage. Little is known about the frequency of persistent infections, mechanical complications, and functional results in patients with retained spacers. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:At a minimum follow-up of 2 years after spacer placement, among patients who do not undergo the second stage revision (replacement of the spacer with a definitive prosthesis of the hip or knee): (1) What was the survival of the spacer free from unplanned reoperation or removal, the cumulative incidence of symptomatic infection, and the overall (Kaplan-Meier) survivorship of the patients? (2) What is the cumulative incidence of mechanical complications (spacer fracture or dislocation)? (3) What is the ambulatory status of patients who have retained their spacers? METHODS:Between March 2011 and July 2023, a total of 111 and 152 patients underwent first-stage revision with an articulating spacer placement as part of a planned two-stage procedure for chronic PJI after THA and TKA at our institution, respectively. Of these, 21% (23 of 111) in the THA group and 24% (37 of 152) in the TKA group did not undergo the anticipated second-stage reimplantation at our institution at least 1 year after spacer placement. Among the original cohorts, 2% (2 of 111) of patients who underwent THA and 3% (4 of 152) of patients who underwent TKA subsequently underwent second-stage reimplantation at outside institutions when reviewed, leaving 19% (21 of 111) in the THA group and 22% (33 of 152) in the TKA group with retained spacers. Of the original cohorts, 7% (8 of 111) in the THA group and 5% (8 of 152) in the TKA group did not have a 2-year follow-up, leaving 12% (13 of 111) of patients with THA and 16% (25 of 152) of patients with TKA available for analysis with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up or death in this retrospective study. The median (range) follow-up from spacer placement to the latest follow-up was 5 years (2 to 11) for patients with THA and 4 years (2 to 8) for patients with TKA. In the THA cohort, the median (range) age was 72 years (59 to 86), and eight patients were female; the median BMI was 32 kg/m2, and the median Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was 3.5. In the TKA cohort, the median (range) age was 69 years (45 to 83), 13 patients were female, the median BMI was 31 kg/m2, and the median CCI was 4. Complication data following spacer placement were obtained from the electronic medical record and by telephone follow-up when needed. Clinical symptoms (swelling, erythema, warmth, fever, drainage, sinus tract, and pain), inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate), available radiographic findings, and laboratory test results (including synovial fluid analysis when obtained) were reviewed for evidence of infection or spacer-related mechanical failure. Infection after the spacer placement was defined as failure when the treating surgeon determined that an unplanned return to the operating room or spacer removal was warranted, acknowledging that postoperative evaluation thresholds varied among surgeons. Spacer-related mechanical failure was defined as spacer fracture or dislocation leading to reoperation or spacer removal. Patients were classified based on whether they underwent an unplanned reoperation or spacer removal. Patients who did not undergo unplanned reoperation or spacer removal were further categorized based on use of chronic suppressive antibiotics (decisions regarding chronic antibiotic therapy were made by the treating surgeon and/or infectious disease team). Patients who underwent reoperation were those who returned to the operating room because of concerning clinical, imaging, and/or laboratory findings of infection or mechanical complications, and the treating surgeon decided to proceed with revision surgery. All reoperation decisions were made by fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons with high-volume experience in two-stage revision. We used a competing-risks model to estimate survival of the spacer free from unplanned reoperation or removal attributable to infection or mechanical complications (calculated as 1 minus the corresponding cumulative incidence), with death treated as a competing event. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate patient survivorship, with death as the endpoint. Mortality data were obtained from medical records and hospital databases and were confirmed by telephone follow-up with family members and public records when needed. Ambulatory status before and after spacer placement was summarized descriptively and reported only for patients with both prespacer and postspacer data available (10 THAs and 25 TKAs); no formal hypothesis testing was performed for ambulatory or functional measures. RESULTS:At 2 years of follow-up, the survival of the spacer free from unplanned reoperation or removal was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80% to 99%) for patients with THA and TKA combined, the cumulative incidence of infection was 5% (95% CI 0% to 12%), and the Kaplan-Meier survivorship of the patients was 92% (95% CI 84% to 100%). The cumulative incidence of mechanical complications (spacer fracture or dislocation) was 5% (95% CI 0% to 13%). In the THA cohort (10 patients), ambulatory status before the first stage included two patients using a wheelchair, two using a walker, one using crutches, two using a cane, and three walking without assistive devices. At latest follow-up, four patients used a wheelchair, two used a walker, two used a cane, and two walked without assistive devices. In the knee cohort (25 patients), ambulatory status before the first stage included two patients using a wheelchair, five using a walker, 13 using a cane, and five walking without assistive devices. At latest follow-up, two patients used a wheelchair, five used a walker, 13 used a cane, and five walked without assistive devices. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Retained articulating spacers can provide infection control in selected patients who do not proceed to reimplantation after first-stage spacer placement for PJI. Although infection-free spacer survival is achievable, these patients remain at risk for mechanical complications, including dislocation and fracture, as well as progressive functional decline. These risks should be clearly discussed during preoperative counseling to align expectations and support informed decision-making. Further studies are needed to refine patient selection, improve spacer durability, and standardize definitions of treatment success in PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, case series.

BACKGROUND:This study compares clinical and functional outcomes between simultaneous hardware removal during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and staged TKA after prior hardware removal. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 155 patients who had prior knee hardware and underwent elective primary TKA between 2012 and 2024 at an urban academic institution. Patients were categorized into "simultaneous" removal during TKA (n = 127) or "staged" TKA after removal (n = 28), and stratified by hardware type (minor/moderate/major). RESULTS:Simultaneous procedures involved significantly less "major hardware," single incisions, and tibial stem extensions than staged procedures (32.3 versus 78.6%, P < 0.001; 81.9 versus 100%, P = 0.007; and 0.8 versus 10.7%, P = 0.019, respectively). Hardware, particularly the major type, was more often retained or partially retained in the simultaneous group (48.0 versus 21.4%, P = 0.008). Reoperation, revision, and infection rates did not significantly differ based on timing or hardware location. Simultaneous patients had smaller 3-month Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity and Interference score reductions (-1.6 versus -9.9, P = 0.006 and +0.4 versus - 7.2, P = 0.007, respectively), but greater 2-year Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement improvements (+25.0 versus - 1.1, P = 0.006) compared to staged patients. Simultaneous major hardware removal demonstrated significantly greater 2-year Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and PROMIS Pain Interference improvement (+32.0 versus -5.5, P = 0.001, and -6.2 versus +5.8, P = 0.027, respectively), but smaller 2-week PROMIS Pain Intensity score reduction (+2.2 versus -4.9, P = 0.050) compared to staged procedures. CONCLUSIONS:Simultaneous hardware removal during TKA led to higher retained major hardware rates and fewer single incisions than staged procedures, without increased reoperation or revision risks. Despite higher 3-month pain scores, simultaneous surgery achieved greater 2-year functional improvement, suggesting it offers advantages for select patients.