Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:In response to physician and patient concerns, many institutions have adopted protocols aimed at reducing postoperative opioid consumption after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Thus, this study sought to examine how consumption of opioids has changed following TKA in the past 6 years. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective review of all 10,072 patients who received primary TKA at our institution from January 2016 to April 2021. We collected baseline demographic data including patient age, sex, race, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) classification, as well as dosage and type of opioid medication prescribed on each postoperative day while the patient was hospitalized following TKA. This data was converted to milligram morphine equivalents (MME) per day hospitalized to compare rates of opioid use over time. RESULTS:Our analysis found the greatest daily opioid use was in 2016 (43.2 ± 68.6 MME/day) and the least was in 2021 (15.0 ± 29.2 MME/day). Linear regression analyses found a significant linear downward trend in postoperative opioid consumption over time, with a decrease of 5.55 MME per day per year (Adjusted R-squared: 0.982, P < .001). The highest visual analog scale (VAS) score was 4.45 in 2016 and the lowest was 3.79 in 2021 (P < .001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Opioid reducing protocols have been implemented for patients recovering from primary TKA in an effort to decrease reliance on opioids for postoperative pain control. The results of this study demonstrate that such protocols have been successful in reducing overall opioid use during hospitalization following TKA. LEVEL III EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective Cohort.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Selective use of dual mobility (DM) implants in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients at high dislocation risk has been proposed. However, evidence-based utilization thresholds have not been defined. We explored whether surgeon-specific rates of DM utilization correlate with rates of readmission and reoperation for dislocation. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 14,818 primary THA procedures performed at a single institution between 2011 and 2021, including 14,310 FB and 508 DM implant constructs. Outcomes including 90-day readmissions and reoperations were compared between patients who had fixed-bearing (FB) and DM implants. Cases were then stratified into three groups based on the attending surgeon's rate of DM utilization (≤1, 1 to 10, or >10%) and outcomes were compared. RESULTS:There were no differences in 90-day outcomes between FB and DM implant groups. Surgeon frequency of DM utilization ranged from 0 to 43%. There were 48 surgeons (73%) who used DM in ≤ 1% of cases, 11 (17%) in 1 to 10% of cases, and 7 (10%) in >10% of cases. The 90-day rates of readmission (7.3 vs 7.6 vs 7.2%, P=0.7) and reoperation (3.4 vs 3.9 vs 3.8%, P=0.3), as well as readmission for instability (0.5 vs 0.6 vs 0.8%, P=0.2) and reoperation for instability (0.5 vs 0.5 vs 0.8%, P=0.6), did not statistically differ between cohorts. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Selective DM utilization did not reduce 90-day readmissions or reoperations following primary THA. Other dislocation-mitigation strategies (i.e., surgical approach, computer navigation, robotic assistance, and large diameter fixed-bearings) may have masked any benefits of selective DM use.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Previous studies have shown lower morbidity and mortality rates after total hip arthroplasty (THA) at academic teaching hospitals. This study sought to determine the relationship between hospital teaching status and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following primary THA. METHODS:Using American Joint Replacement Registry data from 2012 to 2020, 4,447 primary, elective THAs with both preoperative and one-year postoperative Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR) scores were analyzed. The main exposure variable was hospital teaching status, with three cohorts: major teaching hospitals; minor teaching hospitals; and non-teaching hospitals. Mean preoperative and one-year postoperative HOOS, JR scores were compared. RESULTS:Preoperative HOOS, JR scores (non-teaching: 49.69±14.42 vs. major teaching: 47.68±15.10 vs. minor teaching: 42.46±19.19, P<0.001) were significantly higher at non-teaching hospitals than major and minor teaching hospitals, and these differences persisted at one-year postoperatively (87.40±15.14 vs. 83.87±16.68 vs. 80.37±19.27, P<0.001). Both preoperative and postoperative differences in HOOS, JR scores were less than the Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) at both time points. In multivariate regressions, non-teaching and minor teaching hospitals had similar odds of MCID achievement in HOOS, JR scores compared to major teaching hospitals. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Using the HOOS, JR score as a validated outcome measure, undergoing primary THA at an academic teaching hospital did not correlate with higher postoperative HOOS, JR scores or greater chances of MCID achievement in HOOS, JR scores compared to non-teaching hospitals. Further work is required to determine the most important factors that may lead to improvement in patient-reported outcomes following THA.

This study sought to determine common complications and the rates of readmission and revision in total hip arthroplasty patients younger than 65 years. Using the American Joint Replacement Registry, we conducted a retrospective review of all THAs in patients aged 18 to 65 years from 2012 to 2020. We excluded patients aged older than 65 years, revisions, oncologic etiology, conversion from prior surgery, and nonelective cases. Primary outcomes included cumulative revision rate, 90-day readmission rate, and reason for revision. The Kaplan-Meier method and univariate analysis were used. Five thousand one hundred fifty-three patients were included. The average age was 56.7 years (SD 7.8 years), 51% were female, 85% were White, and 89% had a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 0 (1 = 7%, >2 = 4%). The mean follow-up was 39.57 months. Fifty-three patients (1.0%) underwent revision. Seventy-four patients (1.4%) were readmitted within 90 days. Revision was more common in Black patients (P = 0.023). Survivorship was 99% (95% confidence interval, 98.7 to 99.3) and 99% (95% confidence interval, 98.5 to 99.3) at 5 and 8 years, respectively. Infection (21%), instability (15%), periprosthetic fracture (15%), and aseptic loosening (9%) were the most common indications for revision. Total hip arthroplasty performed in young and presumed active patients had a 99% survivorship at 8 years. A long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate survival trends in this growing population.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Reduced bone mineral density (BMD) and disruption of normal bony architecture are the characteristics of osteopenia and osteoporosis and in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) may cause failure of trabecular ingrowth. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of reduced BMD on outcomes following primary elective THA. METHODS:A retrospective chart review of 650 elective THAs with a DEXA scan in their electronic health record (EHR) from 2011 to 2020 was conducted at an urban, academic center and a regional, health center. Patients were separated into three cohorts based on their t-score and the World Health Organizations definitions: normal (t-score ≥ - 1), osteopenia (t-score < - 1.0 and > - 2.5), and osteoporosis (t-score ≤ - 2.5). Demographic and outcome data were assessed. Subsidence was assessed for patients with non-cemented THAs. Regression models were used to account for demographic differences. RESULTS:650 elective THAs, of which only 11 were cemented, were included in the study. Patients with osteopenia and osteoporosis were significantly older than those without (p = 0.002 and p < 0.0001, respectively) and had a lower BMI (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively). PFx was significantly greater in patients with osteoporosis when compared to those with normal BMD (6.5% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.04). No such difference was found between osteoporotic and osteopenic patients. The revision rate was significantly higher for osteoporotic patients than osteopenic patients (7.5% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.04). No such difference was found between the other comparison groups. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients with osteoporosis were older with reduced BMI and had increased PFx after non-cemented elective THA. Understanding this can help surgeons formulate an appropriate preoperative plan for the treatment of patients with osteoporotic bone undergoing elective THA.

Background:National projections of future joint arthroplasties are useful for understanding the changing burden of surgery and related outcomes on the health system. The aim of this study is to update the literature by producing Medicare projections for primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) procedures until 2040 and 2060.Methods:The present study used data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare/Medicaid Part B National Summary and combined procedure counts with use of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to identify whether the procedure was a primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure. In 2019, the annual volume of primary TKA was 480,958 and that of primary THA was 262,369. These values formed a baseline from which we generated point forecasts for 2020-2060 and 95% forecast intervals (FIs).Results:Between 2000 and 2019, the estimated annual volume of THA increased by 177% and that of TKA increased by 156% on average. Regression analysis projected an annual growth rate of 5.2% for THA and 4.44% for TKA. Based on these yearly projected increases, an estimated increase of 28.84% and 24.28% is expected for each 5-year period after 2020 for THA and TKA, respectively. By 2040, the number of THAs is projected to be 719,364 (95% FI, 624,766 to 828,286) and the number of TKA is projected to be 1,222,988 (95% FI, 988,714 to 1,512,772). By 2060, the number of THAs is projected to be 1,982,099 (95% FI, 1,624,215 to 2,418,839) and the number of TKAs is projected to be 2,917,959 (95% FI, 2,160,951 to 3,940,156). In 2019, Medicare data showed that THA constituted approximately 35% of TJA procedures performed.Conclusions:Based on 2019 total volume counts, our model forecasts an increase in THA procedures of 176% by 2040 and 659% by 2060. The estimated increase for TKA is projected to be 139% by 2040 and 469% by 2060. An accurate projection of future primary TJA procedure demands is important in order to understand future health-care utilization and surgeon demand. This finding is only applicable to a Medicare population and demands further analysis to see if this extends to other population groups.Level of Evidence:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

One of the primary aims of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is restoration of the mechanical axis of the lower limb. Maintenance of the mechanical axis within 3° of neutral has been shown to result in improved clinical results and implant longevity. Handheld image-free robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (HI-TKA) is a novel way of performing TKA in the era of modern robotic-assisted TKA. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of achieving targeted alignment, component placement, clinical outcomes, as well as patient satisfaction after HI-TKA.

BACKGROUND:Indications for surgery may impact resource utilization in aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), and understanding these relationships would facilitate risk-stratification preoperatively. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of rTKA indications on readmission, reoperation, length of stay (LOS), and cost. METHODS:We reviewed all 962 patients who underwent aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopedic specialty hospital between June 2011-April 2020 with at least 90 days of follow-up. Patients were categorized based on their indication for aseptic rTKA as listed in the operative report. Demographics, surgical factors, LOS, readmission, reoperation and cost were compared between cohorts. RESULTS:There were significant differences in operative time among cohorts (p < 0.001), highest among the periprosthetic fracture group (164.2 ± 59.8 min). Reoperation rate was greatest in the extensor mechanism disruption cohort (50.0 %, p = 0.009). Total cost differed significantly among groups (p < 0.001), which was highest among the implant failure cohort (134.6 % of mean) and lowest for component malpositioning cohort (90.2 % of mean). Similarly, there were significant differences in direct cost (p < 0.001) which was highest in the periprosthetic fracture cohort (138.5 % of mean), and lowest in the implant failure cohort (90.5 % of mean). There were no differences in discharge disposition, or number of re-revisions among all groups. CONCLUSIONS:Operative time, components revised, LOS, readmissions, reoperation rate, total cost and direct cost following aseptic rTKA varied significantly between different revision indications. These differences should be noted for preoperative planning, resource allocation, scheduling, and risk-stratification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III, retrospective observational analysis.

BACKGROUND:Many studies have demonstrated that in patients whose primary language is not English, outcomes after orthopaedic surgery are worse compared to primary English speakers. The goal of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) who prefer English as their first language versus those who prefer a different language. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary TKA from May 2012 to July 2021. Patients were separated into two groups based on whether English was their preferred primary language (PPL). Of the 13,447 patients who underwent primary TKA, 11,290 reported English as their PPL and 2,157 preferred a language other than English. Patients whose PPL was not English were further stratified based on whether they requested interpreter services. Multiple regression analyses were performed to determine the significance of perioperative outcomes while controlling for demographic differences. RESULTS:Our analysis found that non-English PPL patients had significantly lower rates of readmission (p=0.040), overall revision (p=0.028), and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA; p=0.025) within 90 days postoperatively. Sub analyses of the non-English PPL group showed that those who requested interpreter services had significantly lower one year revision (p<0.001) and overall MUA (p=0.049) rates. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our results demonstrate that TKA patients who communicated in English without an interpreter were significantly more likely to undergo revision, readmission, and MUA. These findings may suggest that language barriers may make it more difficult to identify postoperative problems or concerns in non-English speakers, which may limit appropriate postoperative care.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Kinematically designed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to restore normal kinematics by replicating the function of both cruciate ligaments. Traditional posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA designs, on the other hand, simplify knee kinematics and may improve TKA cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients who underwent primary TKA using either a traditional PS or kinematically designed TKA. METHODS:This retrospective study examined all patients who underwent primary TKA using either a kinematically or a traditional PS designed TKA implant, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patient demographics, complications, readmissions, revision rates and causes, range of motion (ROM) and patient reported outcomes (KOOS, JR) were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed to estimate freedom from revision, and multivariate regression was performed to control for confounding variables. RESULTS:A total of 396 TKAs [173 (43.7%) with a kinematic design, 223 (56.3%) with a traditional design] with a mean follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.51 years underwent analysis. Revision rates did not differ between groups (9.8% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.418). In Kaplan-Meier analysis at 2-year follow-up, freedom from all-cause revision (96.4% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.139) were similar between groups. The two cohorts had no significant difference in aseptic loosening at 2 years (99.6% vs. 97.1, p = 0.050) and at latest follow up (92.7% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.279). KOOS, JR scores and post-operative ROM were similar between groups. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrated similar mid-term outcomes following the use of both a kinematically designed and a traditionally designed implant in primary TKA patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective study-III.