Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:To improve revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) prognosis and postoperative management, a better understanding of how non-elective and elective indications influence clinical outcomes is needed. We sought to compare ambulatory status, complication rates, and implant survival rates in patients who underwent aseptic rTHA for periprosthetic fracture or elective indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:This retrospective study examined all aseptic rTHA patients with a minimum follow-up of two years at a single tertiary referral center. Patients were divided into two groups: fracture rTHA (F-rTHA) if the patient had a periprosthetic femoral or acetabular fracture, and elective rTHA (E-rTHA) if the patient underwent rTHA for other aseptic indications. Multivariate regression was performed for clinical outcomes to adjust for baseline characteristics, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to assess implant survival. RESULTS:A total of 324 patients (F-rTHA: 67, E-rTHA: 257) were included. In the F-rTHA cohort, 57 (85.0%) and 10 (15.0%) had femoral and acetabular periprosthetic fractures, respectively. F-rTHA patients were more likely to be discharged to skilled nursing (40.3% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.049) and acute rehabilitation facilities (19.4% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.004). F-rTHA patients had higher 90-day readmission rates (26.9% vs. 16.0%, p = 0.033). Ambulatory status at three months postoperatively significantly differed (p = 0.004); F-rTHA patients were more likely to use a walker (44.6% vs. 18.8%) and less likely to ambulate independently (19.6% vs. 28.6%) or with a cane (28.6% vs. 41.1%). These differences did not persist at one and two years postoperatively. Freedom from all-cause re-revision (77.6% vs. 74.7%, p = 0.912) and re-revision due to PJI (88.1% vs. 91.9%, p = 0.206) were similar at five-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:Compared to rTHA performed for elective aseptic indications, fracture rTHA patients had poorer early functional outcomes, with greater need for ambulatory aids and non-home discharge. However, these differences did not persist long term and did not portend increased infection or re-revision rates.

BACKGROUND:The lower morbidity and mortality rate associated with increased surgeon and hospital volume may also correlate with improved patient-reported outcome measures. The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between surgeon and hospital volume and patient-reported outcome measures after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using American Joint Replacement Registry data. METHODS:Using American Joint Replacement Registry data from 2012 to 2020, 8,193 primary, elective TKAs with both preoperative and 1-year postoperative The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) scores were analyzed. This study was powered to detect the minimally clinical important difference (MCID). The main exposure variables were median annual surgeon and hospital volume. Tertiles were formed based on the median annual number of TKAs performed: low-volume surgeons (1 to 52), medium-volume (53 to 114), and high-volume (≥115); low-volume hospitals (1 to 283), medium-volume (284 to 602), and high-volume (≥603). The mean preoperative and 1-year postoperative KOOS-JR were compared. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine the effect of surgeon and hospital volume and demographics on achieving the MCID for KOOS-JR. RESULTS:The mean preoperative and 1-year postoperative KOOS-JR score for low-volume surgeons was 47.78 ± 13.50 and 77.75 ± 16.65, respectively, and 47.32 ± 13.73 and 76.86 ± 16.38 for low-volume hospitals. The mean preoperative and 1-year postoperative KOOS-JR score for medium-volume surgeons was 47.20 ± 13.46 and 76.70 ± 16.98, and 48.93 ± 12.50 and 77.15 ± 16.36 for medium-volume hospitals. The mean preoperative and 1-year postoperative KOOS-JR scores for high-volume surgeons were 49.08 ± 13.04 and 78.23 ± 16.72, and 48.11 ± 13.47 and 78.23 ± 17.22 for high-volume hospitals. No notable difference was observed in reaching MCID for KOOS-JR after adjustment for potential confounders. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:An increased number of TKA cases performed by a given surgeon or at a given hospital did not have an effect on achieving MCID for KOOS-JR outcomes.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Operating room air quality can be affected by several factors including temperature, humidity, and airborne particle burden. Our study examines the role of operating room (OR) size on air quality and airborne particle (ABP) count in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We analyzed all primary, elective TKAs performed within two ORs measuring 278 sq ft. (small) and 501 sq ft. (large) at a single academic institution in the United States from April 2019 to June 2020. Intraoperative measurements of temperature, humidity, and ABP count were recorded. p values were calculated using t test for continuous variables and chi-square for categorical values. RESULTS:91 primary TKA cases were included in the study, with 21 (23.1%) in the small OR and 70 (76.9%) in the large OR. Between-groups comparisons revealed significant differences in relative humidity (small OR 38.5% ± 7.24% vs. large OR 44.4% ± 8.01%, p = 0.002). Significant percent decreases in ABP rates for particles measuring 2.5 μm (- 43.9%, p = 0.007) and 5.0 μm (- 69.0%, p = 0.0024) were found in the large OR. Total time spent in the OR was not significantly different between the two groups (small OR 153.09 ± 22.3 vs. large OR 173 ± 44.6, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Although total time spent in the room did not differ between the large and small OR, there were significant differences in humidity and ABP rates for particles measuring 2.5 μm and 5.0 μm, suggesting the filtration system encounters less particle burden in larger rooms. Larger studies are required to determine the impact this may have on OR sterility and infection rates.

BACKGROUND:Chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is most frequently treated with 2-stage revision in conjunction with antibiotic treatment. The aims of this study were 1) to investigate the characteristics of patients who have recurrent infection following 2-stage revision for PJI and 2) to identify risk factors associated with treatment failure. METHODS:A multicenter retrospective review of 90 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who underwent 2-stage revision for treatment of PJI from March 1, 2003 to July 31, 2019, and had recurrent PJI was conducted. The minimum follow-up was 12 months (median follow up of 2.4 years). Microorganisms, subsequent revision, PJI control status, and final joint status were collected. The infection-free survival after initial 2-stage revision was plotted utilizing the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS:Mean survival time to reinfection was 21.3 months (range, 0.3 to 160.5). There were 14 recurrent infections that were acute PJIs treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), while 76 were chronic and treated with repeat 2-stage revision. The most common pathogen identified for both index and recurrent PJI was coagulase-negative Staphylococci. Pathogen persistence was observed in 14 (22.2%) of recurrent PJIs. In total, 61 (67.8%) patients possessed a prosthetic reimplantation at their most recent follow-up, and 29 (35.6%) patients required intervention following repeat 2-stage. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Overall, 31.1% of the patients obtained infection control after treatment of a failed 2-stage revision due to PJI. The high rate of pathogen persistence and the relatively low survival time to recurrence suggests a need to more closely monitor PJIs cases within 2 years.

BACKGROUND:Supervised machine learning techniques have been increasingly applied to predict patient outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasty procedures. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the applications of supervised machine learning techniques to predict patient outcomes after primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. METHODS:A comprehensive literature search using the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted in July of 2021. The inclusion criteria were studies that utilized supervised machine learning techniques to predict patient outcomes after primary total hip or knee arthroplasty. RESULTS:Search criteria yielded n = 30 relevant studies. Topics of study included patient complications (n = 6), readmissions (n = 1), revision (n = 2), patient-reported outcome measures (n = 4), patient satisfaction (n = 4), inpatient status and length of stay (LOS) (n = 9), opioid usage (n = 3), and patient function (n = 1). Studies involved TKA (n = 12), THA (n = 11), or a combination (n = 7). Less than 35% of predictive outcomes had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in the excellent or outstanding range. Additionally, only 9 of the studies found improvement over logistic regression, and only 9 studies were externally validated. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Supervised machine learning algorithms are powerful tools that have been increasingly applied to predict patient outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty. However, these algorithms should be evaluated in the context of prognostic accuracy, comparison to traditional statistical techniques for outcome prediction, and application to populations outside the training set. While machine learning algorithms have been received with considerable interest, they should be critically assessed and validated prior to clinical adoption.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Surgeons with high volume (HV) of total hip arthroplasty (THA) have seen better outcomes than low volume (LV) surgeons. However, literature regarding surgeon volume and outcomes in morbidly obese THA patients is scarce. This study examines the association between surgeon volume with THA in morbidly obese patients (body mass index ≥40) and their clinical outcomes. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We retrospectively reviewed all morbidly obese patients who underwent primary THA at our institution between March 2012 and July 2020 with 2 years of follow-up. Clinical outcomes were compared between the HV (HVa, top quartile of surgeons with the highest overall yearly THA volume) and LV (LVa) surgeons. Similar analysis was run comparing HV of morbidly obese THA (HVo, top quartile of surgeons with the highest yearly morbidly obese THA volume) and LV of morbidly obese THA (LVo) surgeons. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Six hundred and forty-three patients and 33 surgeons were included. HVa surgeons had significantly shorter length of stay and increased home discharge. HVa and HVo surgeons had significantly shorter operative times. There were no significant differences in overall 90-day major and minor complications or clinical differences in patient-reported outcomes. Revision rates and freedom from revisions did not differ between groups at 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:HVa surgeons had significantly lower length of stay and operative times and increased discharge to home. There was no significant decrease in complications or revisions in either comparison model. Complications, revision rates, and patient satisfaction in morbidly obese patients who undergo THA may be independent of surgeon volume.

Reducing pain and opioid consumption after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an important perioperative consideration. Though commonly used, the combined influence of tourniquets and adductor canal blocks (ACBs) on pain and opioid consumption is unknown. This study evaluated inpatient opioid consumption and pain between patients with TKA based on tourniquet and/or ACB use. Pain and opioid consumption were highest when a tourniquet, but no ACB was used, and lowest when an ACB, but no tourniquet was used - though absolute differences in pain scores were not clinically significant. Tourniquet and ACB use should be considered as part of TKA opioid-sparing protocols.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures are expected to grow exponentially in the upcoming years, highlighting the importance of identifying preoperative risk factors that predispose patients to poor outcomes. The present study sought to determine if preoperative healthcare events (PHEs) influenced outcomes following TKA. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This was a retrospective review of all patients who underwent TKA at a single institution from June 2011 to April 2022. Patients who had a PHE within 90 days of surgery, defined as an emergency department visit or hospital admission, were compared to patients with no history of PHE. Patients who underwent revision, nonelective, and/or bilateral TKA were excluded. Chi-squared analysis and independent sample t-tests were used to determine significant differences between demographic variables. All significant covariates were included in binary logistic regressions used to predict discharge disposition, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = .004) compared to patients without a PHE. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Our results demonstrate that PHEs put patients at significantly greater risk of facility discharge, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision. Moving forward, consideration of elective surgery scheduling in the context of a recent PHE may lead to improved postoperative outcomes. LEVEL III EVIDENCE/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective Cohort Study.