Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The role of advanced imaging in diagnosing aseptic implant loosening following total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting aseptic loosening. METHODS:This was a retrospective review of 342 consecutive patients who underwent revision THA between July 2011 and April 2023 and had a pelvis MRI as part of the preoperative diagnostic evaluation. Among them, 62 patients had an intraoperative diagnosis of aseptic loosening of either the femoral or acetabular component. Patients were stratified based on the concordance between their MRI and radiographs findings. RESULTS:Preoperative MRI showed signs of aseptic loosening in 25/62 patients (sensitivity = 40.3%). Similarly, preoperative radiographs demonstrated signs of aseptic loosening in 27 patients (43.5%). Twelve patients (19.4%) had both MRI and radiographs predictive of aseptic loosening, 22 patients (35.5%) did not show signs of aseptic loosening in either MRI or radiographs, and for 28 patients (45.2%), the results were discordant. Among the patients with a negative radiograph for aseptic loosening (n = 35), 13 patients (37.1%) showed signs of aseptic loosening on MRI. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Aseptic loosening remains an elusive diagnosis, and the findings of this study suggest that the utility of MRI and radiographs as part of the diagnostic process is limited. However, in cases of presumed aseptic loosening with inconclusive radiographs findings, MRI may play a role in improving the diagnostic process. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) are the mainstays surgical treatment for acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, re-operation following DAIR is common, and the risk factors for DAIR failure remain unclear. This study aimed to assess the perioperative characteristics of patients who failed initial DAIR treatment. METHODS:A retrospective review was conducted on 83 patients who underwent DAIR for acute PJI within three months following index surgery from 2011 to 2022, with a minimum one-year follow-up. Surgical outcomes were categorized using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) outcome reporting tool (Tiers 1 to 4). Patient demographics, laboratory data, and perioperative outcomes were compared between patients who had failed (Tiers 3 and 4) (n = 32) and successful (Tiers 1 and 2) (n = 51) DAIR treatment. Logistic regression was also performed. RESULTS:After logistic regression, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (odds ratio (OR): 1.57; P = 0.003), preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) (OR: 1.06; P = 0.014), synovial white blood cell (WBC) (OR: 1.14; P = 0.008), and polymorphonuclear cell (PMN%) counts (OR: 1.05; P = 0.015) were independently associated with failed DAIR. Compared with total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients (OR: 6.08; P = 0.001) were at increased risk of DAIR failure. The type of organism and time from primary surgery were not correlated with DAIR failure. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients who had failed initial DAIR tended to have significantly higher CCI, CRP, synovial WBC, and PMN%. The TKA DAIRs were more likely to fail than the THA DAIRs. These characteristics should be considered when planning acute PJI management, as certain patients may be at higher risk for DAIR failure and may benefit from other surgical treatments.

This article addresses the challenges surrounding hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment in Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs), focusing on the complexities arising from their refusal of blood products and transfusions. Acknowledging the heightened risk of blood loss anemia during joint replacement surgery, this review explores documented strategies that enable safe elective joint arthroplasty in JW patients, emphasizing comparable initial diagnostic methods and non-operative treatments up until the pre-operative stage. Special considerations should be taken in the perioperative and intraoperative stage. Despite these challenges, safe arthroplasty is feasible with satisfactory outcomes through a combination of careful preoperative optimization, blood saving protocols, and cultural sensitivity.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Robotic systems for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may utilize computed tomography three-dimensional modeling and intraoperative ligamentous balancing data to assist surgeons with implant size and position. This study evaluated the effect of such robotic systems on implant selection. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We reviewed 645 TKAs performed with a single prosthetic design at 2 academic medical centers between 2016 and 2022. A robotic system was utilized in 304 TKAs, 341 were conventionally instrumented. Implant sizing was compared between cohorts. Multivariate analyses assessed for confounding and effect modification on the basis of demographics. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = .017). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Robotic-arm assisted TKA with computed tomography-based three-dimensional planning was associated with a larger mean tibial component size and a smaller mean femoral component size when compared to conventionally instrumented TKAs. Observed differences likely reflect differences in the data informing implant size selection; effects on clinical outcomes warrant further study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Previous studies have attempted to validate the risk assessment and prediction tool (RAPT) in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients. The purpose of this study was to: (1) identify patients who had an extended length of stay (LOS) following THA; and (2) compare the accuracy of 2 previously validated RAPT models. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all primary THA patients from 2014 to 2021 who had a completed RAPT score. Youden's J computational analysis was used to determine the LOS where facility discharge was statistically more likely. Based on the cut-offs proposed by Oldmeadow and Dibra, patients were separated into high- (O: 1 to 5 versus D: 1 to 3), medium- (O: 6 to 9 versus D: 4 to 7), and low- (O: 10 to 12 versus D: 8 to 12) risk groups. RESULTS:We determined that an LOS of greater than 2 days resulted in a higher chance of facility discharge. In these patients (n = 717), the overall predictive accuracy (PA) of the RAPT was 79.8%. The Dibra model had a higher PA in the high-risk group (D: 68.2 versus O: 61.2% facility discharge). The Oldmeadow model had a higher PA in the medium-risk (O: 78.7 versus D: 61.4% home discharge) and low-risk (O: 97.0 versus D. 92.5% home discharge) groups. CONCLUSIONS:As institutions continue to optimize LOS, the RAPT may need to be defined in the context of a patient's hospital stay. In patients requiring an LOS of greater than 2 days, the originally established RAPT cut-offs may be more accurate in predicting discharge disposition. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND:Patient comorbidities can lead to worse outcomes and increase the risk of revisions after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Sparse research is available on the effects of ostomies on postoperative outcomes. Our study aimed to assess whether patients who have ostomies, who underwent TKA or THA, have worse outcomes and increased rates of all-cause and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI)-related revisions. METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study comparing the outcomes of THA and TKA patients who have and do not have a history of ostomy using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System. Patient demographics, ostomy diagnosis, 3-month emergency department visits and readmissions, and revisions were collected. A total of 126,414 THA and 216,037 TKA cases were included. Log-rank testing and a Cox proportional hazards model were used to account for covariates. RESULTS:In total, 463 THA patients (0.4%) had ostomies. They had a longer length of stay (4.0 versus 3.1 days, P < 0.001) and were less likely to be discharged home (55.3 versus 62.2%, P = 0.01). They had higher rates of PJI-related revisions (1.9 versus 0.9%, P = 0.02) and had increased odds of PJI-related revision (OR [odds ratio] = 2.2, P = 0.02). Of TKA patients, 619 patients (0.3%) had an ostomy. They had a longer length of stay (3.6 versus 3.3 days, P = 0.02) and was less likely to be discharged home (49.4 versus 52.4%, P = 0.16). However, there was no difference in the rate (1.8 versus 1.4%, P = 0.49) or odds (OR = 1.2, P = 0.53) of PJI-related revision. CONCLUSIONS:THA, but not TKA, patients who have ostomies have an increased risk of PJI-related revisions. The proximity of the surgical incision to the ostomy site may play a role in the risk of PJI in THA patients.

BACKGROUND:Though previous studies have demonstrated improved cost benefits associated with simultaneous versus staged bilateral total hip arthroplasty (simBTHA and staBTHA), further investigation is needed regarding the revenues and contribution margins (CMs) of these procedures. In this study, we compared revenue, CM, and surgical outcomes between simBTHA and staBTHA. METHODS:All patients who underwent simBTHA (both procedures completed the same day) and staBTHA (procedures completed on different days within one year) between 2011 and 2021 at a single high-volume orthopedic specialty hospital were identified. Of the 1,517 identified patients (n = 139 simBTHA, n = 1,378 staBTHA), 232 were included in a 1:1 propensity match based on baseline demographics (116 per cohort). Revenue, costs, CM, and surgical outcomes were compared between cohorts. RESULTS:Compared to staBTHA, simBTHA procedures had significantly lower total costs (P < .001), direct costs (P < .001), and patient revenue. There was no significant difference in CM between groups (P = .361). Additionally, there were no significant differences in length of stay (P = .173), operative time (P = .438), 90-day readmissions (P = .701), 90-day revisions (P = .313), or all-cause revisions (P = .701) between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:Though simBTHA procedures have lower revenues than staBTHA, they also have lower costs, resulting in similar CM between procedures. As both procedures have similar postoperative complication rates, further research is required to evaluate specifically which patients may benefit from simBTHA versus staBTHA regarding clinical and patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.

BACKGROUND:The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS JR) is a widely used patient-reported outcome measures questionnaire for total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, not all patients choose to complete HOOS JR, and thus, a subset of the THA population may be underrepresented. This study aims to investigate the association between patient demographic factors and HOOS JR response rates. METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of adult, English-speaking patients who underwent primary THA by a fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeon between 2017 and 2023 at a single, high-volume academic institution. The HOOS JR completion status-complete or incomplete-was recorded for each patient within 90 days of surgery. Standard statistical analyses were performed to assess completion against multiple patient demographic factors. RESULTS:Of the 2,908 total patients, 2,112 (72.6%) had complete and 796 (27.4%) had incomplete HOOS JR questionnaires. Multivariate analysis yielded statistical significance (P < .05) for the distribution of patient age, race, insurance, marital status, and income quartile with respect to questionnaire completion. Patient sex or religion did not affect response rates. Failure to complete HOOS JR (all P < .001) was associated with patients aged 18 to 39 (59.8%), who identified as Black (36.4%) or "other" race (39.6%), were never married (38%), and were in the lower half income quartiles (43.9%, 35.9%) when compared to the overall incomplete rate. CONCLUSIONS:Multiple patient demographic factors may affect the HOOS JR response rate. Overall, our analyses suggest that older patients who identify as White and are of higher socioeconomic status are more likely to participate in the questionnaire. Efforts should focus on capturing patient groups less likely to participate to elucidate more generalizable trends in arthroplasty outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) is a risk factor for dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The effect of the surgical approach on this association has not been investigated. This study examined the association between the surgical approach and dislocation following THA in patients who had prior LSF. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 16,223 primary elective THAs at our institution from June 2011 to September 2022. Patients who had LSF prior to THA were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Patients were stratified by LSF history, surgical approach, and intraoperative robot or navigation use to compare dislocation rates. There were 8,962 (55.2%) posterior, 5,971 (36.8%) anterior, and 1,290 (8.0%) laterally based THAs. Prior LSF was identified in 323 patients (2.0%). Binary logistic regressions were used to assess the association of patient factors with dislocation risk. RESULTS:There were 177 dislocations identified in total (1.1%). In nonadjusted analyses, the dislocation rate was significantly higher following the posterior approach among all patients (P = .003). Prior LSF was associated with a significantly higher dislocation rate in all patients (P < .001) and within the posterior (P < .001), but not the anterior approach (P = .514) subgroups. Multivariate regressions demonstrated anterior (OR [odds ratio] = 0.64, 95% CI [confidence interval] 0.45 to 0.91, P = .013), and laterally based (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.96, P = .039) approaches were associated with decreased dislocation risk, whereas prior LSF (OR = 4.28, 95% CI 2.38 to 7.69, P < .001) was associated with increased dislocation risk. Intraoperative technology utilization was not significantly associated with dislocation in the multivariate regressions (OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.06, P = .095). CONCLUSIONS:The current study confirmed that LSF is a significant risk factor for dislocation following THA; however, anterior and laterally based approaches may mitigate dislocation risk in this population. In multivariate analyses, including surgical approach, LSF, and several perioperative variables, intraoperative technology utilization was not found to be significantly associated with dislocation risk.

BACKGROUND:The impact of increased patient comorbidities on the cost-effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THAs) is lacking. This study aimed to compare revenue, costs, and short-term (90 days) surgical outcomes between patients who have and do not have a high comorbidity burden (HCB). METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 14,949 patients who underwent an elective, unilateral THA between 2012 and 2021. Patients were stratified into HCB (Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5 and American Society of Anesthesiology scores of 3 or 4) and non-HCB groups, and were further 1:1 propensity matched based on baseline characteristics. Perioperative data, revenue, costs, and contribution margins (CMs) of the inpatient episode were compared between groups. Also, 90-day readmissions and revisions were compared between groups. Of the 11,717 patients who had available financial data (n = 1,017 HCB, n = 10,700 non-HCB), 1,914 patients were included in the final matched analyses (957 per group). RESULTS:Total (P < .001) and direct (P < .001) costs were significantly higher for HCB patients. Comparable revenue between cohorts (P = .083) resulted in a significantly decreased CM in the HCB patient group (P < .001). The HCB patients were less likely to be discharged home (P < .001) and had significantly higher 90-day readmission rates (P = .049). CONCLUSIONS:Increased THA costs for HCB patients were not matched by increased revenue, resulting in decreased CM. Higher rates of nonhome discharge and readmissions in the HCB population add to the additional financial burden. Adjustments to the current reimbursement models should better account for the increased financial burden of HCB patients undergoing THA and ensure access to care for all patient populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.