Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The clinical impact of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains unclear. In this study, we evaluate the effect of VTE following TJA on postoperative outcomes including discharge disposition, readmission rates, and revision rates. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all patients over the age of 18 who underwent primary, elective THA or TKA between 2013 and 2020. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on whether or not they had a VTE following their procedure. Baseline patient demographics and clinical outcomes such as readmissions and revisions were collected. Propensity score matching was performed to limit significant demographic differences, while independent sample t-tests and Pearson's chi-squared test were used to compare outcomes of interest between the groups. RESULTS:, p = 0.032). All other patient demographics were similar. Compared to the non-VTE cohort, the VTE cohort was less likely to be discharged home (66.1% vs 80.7%; p = 0.021), had a higher rate of 90-day all-cause readmissions (27.5% vs 9.2%, p = 0.001), and a higher two-year revision rate (11.0% vs 0.9%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients with postoperative VTE were less likely to be discharged home and had higher 90-day readmission and two-year revision rates. Therefore, mitigating perioperative risk factors, initiating appropriate long-term anticoagulation, and maintaining close follow-up for patients with postoperative VTE may play significant roles in decreasing hospital costs and the economic burden to the healthcare system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Although tourniquet use in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been widely studied, the outcomes associated with tourniquet use in revision TKA (rTKA) remains relatively unexplored. This study investigates surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction in association with tourniquet use during aseptic rTKA. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent rTKA for aseptic causes at our institution from 2011-2020. Patients were separated into two cohorts based on tourniquet inflation during the procedure. Outcomes of interest included estimated blood loss (EBL), change in hemoglobin (Hb), surgical time, length-of-stay (LOS), reoperation rate, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS,JR) scores. RESULTS:Of the 1,212 patients included, 1,007 (83%) underwent aseptic rTKA with the use of a tourniquet and 205 (17%) without the use of a tourniquet. The mean tourniquet inflation time was 93.0 minutes (SD:33.3 minutes). Blood loss was significantly less for patients in the tourniquet cohort as measured through EBL(224.1vs.325.1 mL,p<0.001) and change in preoperative to postoperative Hb(1.75vs.2.04 g/dL,p<0.001). There were no statistical differences in surgical time(p=0.267) and LOS(p=0.206) between the two groups. The reoperation rate was significantly greater for patients who did not have a tourniquet utilized (20.5%vs.15.0%,p=0.038). Delta improvement in KOOS,JR scores from baseline to 3-months postoperatively did not statistically differ between the two cohorts (p=0.560). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:While delta improvements in KOOS,JR scores were similar for both cohorts, patients who did not have a tourniquet inflated during aseptic rTKA had increased blood loss and were more likely to undergo subsequent reoperation compared to patients who did.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Although readmission has historically been of primary interest, emergency department (ED) visits are increasingly a point of focus and can serve as a potentially unnecessary gateway to readmission. This study aims to analyze the difference between primary and revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) cases in terms of the rate and reasons associated with 90-day ED visits. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent TJA from 2011 to 2021 at a single, large, tertiary urban institution. Patients were separated into two cohorts based on whether they underwent primary or revision TJA (rTJA). Outcomes of interest included ED visit within 90-days of surgery, as well as reasons for ED visit and readmission rate. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to compare the two groups while accounting for all statistically significant demographic variables. RESULTS:Overall, 28,033 patients were included, of whom 24,930 (89%) underwent primary and 3,103 (11%) underwent rTJA. The overall rate of 90-day ED visits was significantly lower for patients who underwent primary TJA in comparison to those who underwent rTJA (3.9% vs 7.0%; p < 0.001). Among those who presented to the ED, the readmission rate was statistically lower for patients who underwent primary TJA compared to rTJA (23.5% vs 32.1%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: 2022;3(7):543-548.

BACKGROUND:Although several techniques and implants have been developed to address bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), management of these defects remains challenging. This review article discusses the indications and management options of bone loss following total knee arthroplasty based on preoperative workup and intraoperative findings. MAIN TEXT/METHODS:Various imaging modalities are available that can be augmented with intraoperative examination to provide a clear classification of a bony defect. For this reason, the Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) classification is frequently used to guide treatment. The AORI provides a reliable system by which surgeons can classify lesions based on their size and involvement of surrounding structures. AORI type I defects are managed with cement with or without screws as well as impaction bone grafting. For AORI type IIA lesions, wedge or block augmentation is available. For large defects encompassing AORI type IIB and type III defects, bulk allografts, cones, sleeves, and megaprostheses can be used in conjunction with intramedullary stems. CONCLUSIONS:Treatment of bone loss in rTKA continues to evolve as different techniques and approaches have been validated through short- and mid-term follow-up. Extensive preoperative planning with imaging, accurate intraoperative evaluation of the bone loss, and comprehensive understanding of all the implant options available for the bone loss are paramount to success.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Surgeons can improve their practice by understanding potentially avoidable reasons for early revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The purpose of this study is to describe potentially avoidable indications for rTKA within 5 years of the index procedure. METHODS:This retrospective observational analysis utilized the rTKA database at a large, academic orthopedic specialty hospital to identify 167 consecutive rTKA from 2014 to 2019 performed within 5 years after primary TKA (pTKA). Two fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons reviewed the cases to classify them as potentially avoidable or unavoidable. Unavoidable indications for rTKA included infection/wound complication, arthrofibrosis, instability due to underlying collagen disease or significant weight loss, and any traumatic event leading to pTKA failure. Potentially avoidable indications included atraumatic instability, intraoperative fracture, metal allergy, and atraumatic patellar instability or maltracking. Aseptic loosening was considered avoidable if it occurred in the presence of component malpositioning or poor cementation technique. RESULTS:There were 112 (67.1%) unavoidable cases and 55 avoidable cases (32.9%). Of the unavoidable cases, there were 68 rTKA for infection or wound complications (60.7%), 23 for arthrofibrosis (20.5%), 6 for instability (5.4%), 6 for postoperative fracture (5.4%), 6 for aseptic loosening (5.4%), and 3 for extensor mechanism pathology following trauma (2.6%). Of the potentially avoidable rTKA, 24 were for aseptic loosening (43.7%), 23 for atraumatic instability (41.8%), 6 for atraumatic extensor mechanism pathology (10.9%), 1 for nickel allergy (1.8%), and 1 for intraoperative fracture (1.8%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These findings indicate that over 30% of early rTKA are potentially avoidable. Interventions should focus on addressing potentially avoidable causes such as short-term aseptic loosening and instability to reduce the need for costly and resource-intensive rTKA. Level of evidence III, retrospective observational analysis.

The study aimed to optimize value-based health care practices in total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and we need to understand how the surgical setting can influence efficiency of care. While this has previously been investigated, the purpose of this study was to clarify if these findings are generalizable to an institution with an orthopaedic specialty hospital. A retrospective review was conducted of 6,913 patients who underwent primary or revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at one of four hospitals within a single, urban, and academic health system: a high volume academic (HVA) hospital, a low volume academic (LVA) hospital, a high volume community (HVC) hospital, or a low volume community (LVC) hospital. Patient demographics were collected in an arthroplasty database, as were operating room (OR) times and several specific time points during the surgery. The HVA (orthopaedic specialty) hospital had the shortest total primary TKA OR times and the LVC that had the longest times (156.69 vs. 174.68, p < 0.0001). The HVA hospital had the shortest total revision TKA OR times, and the LVC had the longest times (158.20 vs. 184.95, p < 0.0001). In our health system, the HVA orthoapedic specialty hospital had the shortest overall OR time, even when compared with the HVC hospital. This is in contradistinction to prior findings that HVC institutions had the shortest OR times in a health system that did not have an orthopaedic specialty hospital. This provides evidence that an orthopaedic specialty hospital can be a model for efficient care, even at an academic teaching institution.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Airborne biologic particles (ABPs) can be measured intraoperatively to evaluate operating room (OR) sterility. Particulate matter (PM) up to 2.5 microns can contain microbial species which may increase infection risk. Our study examines differences in air quality and ABP count in primary (pTKA) and revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). METHODS:We analyzed primary and revision TKAs in a single operating room at an academic institution from January 2020 to December 2020. Procedures from March 15, 2020-May 4, 2020 were excluded to avoid COVID-related confounding. Temperature, humidity, and ABP count per minute were recorded with a particle counter intraoperatively and cross-referenced with surgical data from the electronic health records (EHR) using procedure start and end times. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate differences in variables. P-values were calculated using t-test and chi-square. RESULTS:A total of 107 TKA cases were included: 79(73.8%) pTKAs and 28(26.2%) rTKAs. Time spent in room was significantly higher for rTKAs (primary: 176+46.7 minutes vs. revision: 220+47.1,p<0.0001). Compared to pTKAs, rTKAs had significant percent increases in ABP rates for particles measuring 0.3um(+70.4%,p<0.001), 0.5um(+97.2%,p<0.0001), 1.0um(+53.2%,p=0.001), 2.5um(+30.3%,p=0.017), and for PM 2.5(+108.3%,p<0.001) and PM5.0(+105.6%,p<0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:RTKAs had significantly longer time spent in room and significant percent increases in ABP rates for particles measuring 0.3um, 0.5um, and 1.0um compared to pTKAs. Measurements of PM2.5 and PM5.0 (which can contain large numbers of microbes) were also significantly greater in rTKAs. Further research is needed to determine whether the size and quantity of ABPs translates to higher infection rates following rTKA.

Background:Dual mobility (DM) bearings for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been proposed to reduce the risk of instability in high-risk patients; however, their utility in primary THA remains relatively unexplored. No previous reports have described whether surgical approach influences outcomes associated with DM implant systems. This study aims to compare patient reported outcomes and post-operative groin pain between patients undergoing anterior approach versus posterior approach following primary THA with DM implants. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary THA and received a DM implant between 2011-2021. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on surgical approach (anterior vs. posterior approach). Primary outcomes included the presence of substantial postoperative groin pain as well as readmission and revision rates. Demographic differences were assessed using chi-square and independent sample t-tests. Outcomes were compared using multilinear and logistic regressions. Results:Of the 495 patients identified, 55 (11%) underwent THA via the anterior approach and 440 (89%) via the posterior approach. Surgical time (100.24 vs. 109.42 minutes, p=0.070), length of stay (2.19vs.2.67 days,p=0.072), discharge disposition (p=0.151), and significant postoperative groin pain (1.8%vs.0.7%,p=0.966) did not statistically differ between the cohorts. 90-day readmission (9.1%vs.7.7%,p=0.823) and revision rate (0.0%vs.3.0%,p=0.993) did not significantly differ as well. Specifically, readmission (p=0.993) and revision (p=0.998) for instability did not significantly differ between the cohorts. We found no statistical difference in HOOS, JR (p=0.425), VR-12 PCS (p=0.718), and VR-12 MCS (p=0.257) delta score improvement from preoperative to 1-year follow-up between the two groups. Conclusion:.

INTRODUCTION:Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) retention may impact a patient's awareness of their artificial joint following primary total knee arthroplasty (pTKA) due to increased proprioception and more native knee kinematics. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether cruciate-retaining (CR) or posterior-stabilized (PS) implants influence the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) following pTKA. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent pTKA with a CR or PS implant at our institute between October 2017 and March 2021. Of the 6,258 patients identified, 5,587 did not have recorded FJS-12 scores at either three months, one year, or two years postoperatively nor a Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) preoperatively, three months, or one year postoperatively, and these were considered lost to follow up. Thus, a total of 671 cases were identified and subsequently stratified into two cohorts based on whether they received a CR (n=236, 35%) or PS (n=435, 65%) implant. Patients who received PS implants were further divided into constrained (CoN) and non-constrained (NCoN) liner cohorts. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to compare patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores. RESULTS:There were no significant differences in PRO scores between CR and PS implants at any time point. Patients in the CoN (n=74) cohort had significantly higher FJS-12 scores at one year (CoN: 56.31 + 25.34 vs NCoN: 42.24 + 27.00, p=0.001) and two years (CoN: 58.52 + 33.71 vs NCoN: 46.97 + 27.44, p=0.013) postoperatively compared to patients in the NCoN (n=361) cohort. CONCLUSION:Although our analysis demonstrated significant differences in FJS-12 scores at one and two years postoperatively depending upon the liner constraint, there were no significant differences in FJS-12 scores between CR and PS implants. Therefore, while retention of the PCL does not impact patient awareness of their artificial joint, the level of liner constraint may influence outcomes if the PCL is sacrificed.