Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Malnutrition is associated with poorer outcomes after revision total joint arthroplasty (rTJA), though no universal metric for assessing malnutrition in rTJA patients has been reported. This study sought to determine if malnutrition as defined by the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) can independently predict short-term complication rates and re-revision risk in patients undergoing rTJA. METHODS:All patients ≥ 65 years old undergoing rTJA from 2011 to 2021 at a single orthopaedic specialty hospital were identified. Preoperative albumin, height, and weight were used to calculate GNRI. Based on the calculated GNRI value, patients were stratified into three groups: normal nutrition (GNRI > 98), moderate malnutrition (GNRI 92-98), and severe malnutrition (GNRI < 92). Chi-squared and independent samples t-tests were used to compare groups. RESULTS:A total of 531 rTJA patients were included. Patients with normal nutrition were younger (p < 0.001), had higher BMI (p < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients with severe and moderate malnutrition had longer length of stay (p < 0.001), were less likely to be discharged home (p = 0.049), and had higher 90-day major complication (p = 0.02) and readmission (p = 0.005) rates than those with normal nutrition. 90-day revision rates were similar. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, patients with severe and moderate malnutrition had worse survivorship free of all-cause re-revision at 1-year (p = 0.001) and 2-year (p = 0.002) follow-up compared to those with normal nutrition. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Moderate and severe malnutrition, as defined by GNRI, independently predicted higher complication and revision rates in rTJA patients. This suggests that the GNRI may serve as an effective screening tool for nutritional status in patients undergoing rTJA.

BACKGROUND:Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) can be performed with isolated tibial, isolated femoral, and combined tibial and femoral component exchange for different indications. Replacement of only 1 fixed component in rTKA leads to shorter operative times and decreased complexity. We sought to compare functional outcomes and rates of rerevision in patients undergoing partial and full rTKA. METHODS:This retrospective study examined all aseptic rTKA patients with a minimum follow-up of 2 years in a single center between September 2011 and December 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: full rTKA (F-rTKA) if both components (femoral and tibial) were revised and partial rTKA (P-rTKA) if only 1 component was revised. A total of 293 patients (P-rTKA = 76, F-rTKA = 217) were included. RESULTS:P-rTKA patients had significantly shorter surgical time (109 ± 37 Versus. 141 ± 44 minutes, P < .001). At mean follow-up of 4.2 (range 2.2-6.2) years, rerevision rates did not significantly differ between groups (11.8 Versus. 16.1%, P = .358). Improvements in postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Scale (KOOS), Joint Replacement scores were similar as well (P = .100 and P = .140, respectively). For patients undergoing rTKA due to aseptic loosening, freedom from rerevision due to aseptic loosening was similar between groups (100 Versus. 97.8%, P = .321). For patients undergoing rTKA due to instability, freedom from rerevision due to instability did not significantly differ as well (100 Versus. 98.1%, P = .683). In the P-rTKA cohort, freedom from all-cause and aseptic revision of preserved components was 96.1% and 98.7% at the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSION:Compared to F-rTKA, P-rTKA yielded similar functional outcomes and implant survivorship with shorter surgical time. When indications and component compatibility allow for such a procedure, surgeons can expect good outcomes when performing P-rTKA.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the setting of a previous ipsilateral hip fusion/arthrodesis is an uncommon and challenging procedure. There is little information available in the literature on the challenges and techniques available to perform TKA in these patients. For a traditional TKA procedure, the patient is placed in the supine position and various knee-positioning devices are used to allow for adequate knee and hip flexion, which is required for surgical exposure and tibia preparation. Ipsilateral hip arthrodesis presents two major challenges: (1) Hip flexion is crucial for adequate knee flexion while the patient is supine during the TKA procedure, and (2) the use of advanced technology, specifically computer navigation and robotic-assisted surgery techniques, is limited due to the inability to acquire the hip center of rotation during surgery, due to the lack of hip motion. Therefore, equipment and positioning must be adjusted by the surgeon to facilitate TKA in these patients. This article reports the case of a 72-year-old male patient with a long-standing, painless right hip arthrodesis, presenting with end-stage osteoarthritis of the right knee, leg-length discrepancy, and an 11.6° difference between the mechanical and anatomical axes of the femur. We describe the unique surgical planning as well as the surgical positioning options that allow for adequate knee flexion and proper surgical exposure. Furthermore, we describe a novel method of computer-assisted navigation for intra-operative planning and execution utilizing a reflected tibia as a template for the distal femoral cut.

BACKGROUND:Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and subsequent revision surgeries may affect patients' social and physical health, ability to complete daily activities, and disability status. This study sought to determine how PJI affects patients' quality of life through patient-reported outcome measures with minimum 1-year follow-up. METHODS:Patients who suffered PJI following primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) from 2012 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients met Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for acute or chronic PJI, underwent revision TJA surgery, and had at least 1 year of follow-up. Patients were surveyed regarding how PJI affected their work and disability status, as well as their mental and physical health. Outcome measures were compared between acute and chronic PJIs. In total, 318 patients (48.4% total knee arthroplasty and 51.6% total hip arthroplasty) met inclusion criteria. RESULTS:Following surgical treatment for knee and hip PJI, a substantial proportion of patients reported that they were unable to negotiate stairs (20.5%), had worse physical health (39.6%), and suffered worse mental health (25.2%). A high proportion of patients reported worse quality of life (38.5%) and social satisfaction (35.3%) following PJI. Worse reported patient-reported outcome measures including patients' ability to complete daily physical activities were found among patients undergoing treatment for chronic PJI, and also, 23% of patients regretted their initial decision to pursue primary TJA. CONCLUSIONS:A PJI negatively affects patients' ability to carry out everyday activities. This patient population is prone to report challenges overcoming disability and returning to work. Patients should be adequately educated regarding the risk of PJI to decrease later potential regrets. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Case series (IV).

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.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Prior studies have demonstrated an association between time to revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and indication; however, the impact of early versus late revision on post-operative outcomes has not been reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:A retrospective, observational study examined patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopedic hospital between 6/2011 and 4/2020 with > 1-year of follow-up. Patients were early revisions if they were revised within 2 years of primary TKA (pTKA) or late revisions if revised after greater than 2 years. Patient demographics, surgical factors, and post-operative outcomes were compared. RESULTS:470 rTKA were included (199 early, 271 late). Early rTKA patients were younger by 2.5 years (p = 0.002). The predominant indications for early rTKA were instability (28.6%) and arthrofibrosis/stiffness (26.6%), and the predominant indications for late rTKA were aseptic loosening (45.8%) and instability (26.2%; p < 0.001). Late rTKA had longer operative times (119.20 ± 51.94 vs. 103.93 ± 44.66 min; p < 0.001). There were no differences in rTKA type, disposition, hospital length of stay, all-cause 90-day emergency department visits and readmissions, reoperations, and number of re-revisions. CONCLUSIONS:Aseptic rTKA performed before 2 years had different indications but demonstrated similar outcomes to those performed later. Early revisions had shorter surgical times, which could be attributed to differences in rTKA indication. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III, retrospective observational analysis.

AIMS/UNASSIGNED:Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= -0.102; p = 0.251). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Multiply revised TKA had worse outcomes, with higher rates of facility discharge, longer operative times, and greater reoperation and re-revision rates compared to index rTKA.

BACKGROUND:Prior research has demonstrated that the prescription of opioid medications may be associated with the desire to treat pain in order to achieve favorable patient satisfaction. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the effect of decreased opioid prescribing following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on survey-administered patient satisfaction scores. METHOD/METHODS:This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected survey data for patients who underwent primary elective TKA for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) between September 2014 and June 2019. All patients included had completed Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAPS) survey information. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on whether their surgery took place prior to or subsequent to the implementation of an institutional-wide opioid-sparing regimen. RESULTS:Of the 613 patients included, 488 (80%) were in the pre-protocol cohort and 125 (20%) in the post-protocol cohort. Rate of opioid refills (33.6% to 11.2%; p < 0.001) as well as length of stay (LOS, 2.40 ± 1.05 to 2.13 ± 1.13 days; p = 0.014) decreased significantly after protocol change while rate of current smokers increased significantly (4.1% to 10.4%; p = 0.011). No significant difference was observed in "top box" percentages for satisfaction with pain control (Pre: 70.5% vs Post: 72.8%; p = 0.775). CONCLUSIONS:Protocols calling for reduced prescription of opioids following TKA resulted in significantly lower rates of opioid refills, and were associated with significantly shorter LOS, while causing no statistically significant deleterious changes in patient satisfaction, as measured by HCAPS survey. LOE: III. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:This study suggests that HCAPS scores are not negatively impacted by a reduction in postoperative opioid analgesics.