Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Technological advancements in total hip arthroplasty (THA), including robotic-assisted (RA-THA) and navigation-assisted (NA-THA) techniques, aim to improve outcomes. However, impact on recovery timing remains unclear. This study examined whether these technologies reduce the time to reach the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement compared with conventional THA. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This retrospective study analyzed osteoarthritic THA patients (01/2020-04/2023) who completed preoperative and postoperative Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement questionnaires. The exclusion criteria included bilateral procedures or revision within 1 year. MCID was defined using anchor-based (23 points) and distribution-based thresholds (7.6 points). Multivariable interval-censored accelerated failure time models assessed time to MCID. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= .140). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Anchor-based MCID demonstrated comparable recovery times across RA, NA, and conventional THA, suggesting no patient-perceived advantage with technology. Distribution-based thresholds indicated RA-THA achieved faster statistically significant improvement, though the relevance remains uncertain.

BACKGROUND:Patients who undergo primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may return to work at variable times following surgery, the timeline for which is partly affected by the physical intensity of their occupation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction and limitations when returning to work following TKA. METHODS:This retrospective review surveyed patients undergoing primary TKA between June 2011 and January 2022, with at least 1 year of follow up, regarding return to work. Of the 914 respondents, 507 (55.5 %) worked preoperatively and were stratified into high intensity (HI) (i.e., laborer, construction), standard intensity (SI) (i.e., walking, climbing stairs), or low intensity (LI) (i.e., sedentary desk jobs) groups. Baseline characteristics and survey responses were compared across groups. Among those who worked preoperatively, 35 (6.9 %), 213 (42 %), and 259 (51.1 %) were in the HI, SI, and LI groups, respectively. RESULTS:Of the 507 patients who worked prior to TKA, 447 (88.2 %) returned to work after surgery and 60 (11.8 %) did not. The HI group was comprised of more young males and more smokers than the SI and LI groups. In the LI group, 30 % returned within 1 month following surgery and an additional 44 % within 2 months. Similarly in the SI group, 11 % returned to work in less than 1 month with an additional 39 % returning within 2 months. In the HI group, 4 % returned within the first month and additional 42 % returned within 2 months. HI workers were more commonly hindered in their return (HI: 30.8 %, SI: 23.1 %, LI: 7.7 %), 'moderately declined' in their work ability (HI: 23.1 %, SI: 9.7 %, 3.0 %), and 'very unsatisfied' with their return (HI: 11.5 %, SI: 10.8 %, LI: 8.1 %). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:TKA leads to improvements in work function and satisfaction across all intensity levels, but HI work is associated with longer recovery times and comparatively lower return-to-work satisfaction compared to SI and LI groups.

BACKGROUND:The relationship between total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgeon volume and outcomes is informative in this era of health care value optimisation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes based on modern-day surgeon practice volumes. METHODS:The SPARCS database was queried for patients undergoing primary THA from 2010 to 2020. Annual case volume thresholds were 30 and 150, differentiating high-volume (HV), intermediate-volume (IV), and low-volume (LV) groups. Perioperative outcomes and all-cause cumulative revision rates were evaluated. RESULTS: 0.001). While controlling for confounders, multivariate regression revealed increased odds of PJI for IV (1.5) and LV (1.87) and increased all-cause revision hazard ratio for IV (1.1) and LV (1.3). Cumulative revision rates were lower for HV at 1 and 2 years, but rates converged with IV group at 9 years. CONCLUSIONS:HV surgeons have the most favourable short-term outcomes. However, in the long-term the difference in all-cause revision event rates becomes less apparent.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Technology is increasingly incorporated into unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) through computer-assisted navigation (N-UKA) and robot-assisted surgery (R-UKA) to improve alignment, implant positioning, and gap balancing. Whether intraoperative technology helps achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) compared to conventional UKA (C-UKA) remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to assess whether differences in PROMs between C-UKA and technology-assisted UKA reached MCID values. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:PubMed/MEDLINE/Cochrane Library were reviewed for studies comparing PROMs between primary C-UKA (control group) and N-UKA or R-UKA. Delta improvements were compared to established MCID values. Additional radiographic and clinical differences were assessed. The review yielded four (N=328) N-UKA and seven (N=526) R-UKA studies with C-UKA cohorts as controls. RESULTS:Differences in preoperative and postoperative PROMs were reported as statistically significant in three of four studies (75%) comparing N-UKA and C-UKA; however, none of the studies reported values that reached the MCID. Differences in preoperative and postoperative PROMs were reported as statistically significant in four of seven studies (57.1%) comparing R-UKA and C-UKA; however, only three of the studies (42.9%) reported values that reached the MCID. Improved radiographic outcomes for N-UKA and R-UKA were reported in 75% and 57.1% of studies, respectively. Only one study reported improved revision rates with R-UKA compared to C-UKA. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Though studies may report better improvements in PROMs in N-UKA and R-UKA compared to C-UKA, these often may not achieve clinical significance. Future studies should present outcome differences in the context of validated MCID as well as other metrics such as revision rates and radiographic outliers as the impetus for technology-assisted UKA.

BACKGROUND:Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has recently regained popularity, yet data has raised concerns about rates of arthrofibrosis following these procedures. The purpose of this study was to utilize the American Joint Replacement Registry to compare rates of early manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) in cementless and cemented primary TKAs that use technology or manual instrumentation. METHODS:We queried the American Joint Replacement Registry for all patients ages 18 to 95 years who underwent cemented or cementless primary TKA over a 7-year period. Patients were stratified based on whether technology (robotics or computer-assisted navigation) was used during the primary surgery. Groups were then compared for rates of MUA within 90-day of the index surgery using multivariable logistic regression models. A total of 340,841 cases were included in the study, 78,397 (23%) of which used technology and 262,444 (77%) which did not. Within the technology cohort, there were 51,500 (65%) robotic and 26,897 (35%) navigated cases. There were 65% of technology-assisted TKAs and 92% of manual TKAs cemented. RESULTS:In the technology group, multivariable analysis demonstrated significantly higher odds of MUA in cemented TKAs compared to cementless (odds ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.06 to 3.59]; P = 0.031). Robotic cases had significantly higher odds of MUA with cemented compared to cementless implants (OR 2.38, 95% CI [1.27 to 4.46]; P = 0.007), while there was no difference in MUA related to cementation in the navigated cases (OR 3.53, 95% CI [0.48 to 25.95]; P = 0.22). In the manual group, there were no significant differences in MUA rates related to cementation use (OR 1.14, 95% CI [0.8 to 1.64]; P = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS:Cementless TKA did not increase odds of MUA. In further analyzing cement use into technology and manual cohorts, robotic-assisted cemented TKAs had higher rates of early MUA than cementless. Identification of risk factors leading to early arthrofibrosis may be patient dependent and further study is required to elucidate any surgical considerations.

BACKGROUND:Recovery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) shows considerable variability in both pain relief and functional improvement. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS-JR) is a widely used measure for evaluating these outcomes. This study aimed to identify distinct latent recovery trajectories, which represent underlying, unobserved patterns of postoperative recovery inferred from KOOS-JR scores, and to explore patient characteristics associated with these trajectories. METHODS:This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent primary TKA for osteoarthritis at a tertiary academic center from January 2020 to March 2023. Inclusion criteria required patients to have completed a preoperative KOOS-JR questionnaire and at least two postoperative follow-ups at 1, 3, 6, or 12 months. Exclusion criteria included bilateral or revision procedures. Collected characteristics included age, sex, Body Mass Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, race, smoking status, procedure type, anesthesia type, length of hospital stay, and discharge disposition. Growth mixture modeling was used to model recovery trajectories, with associations evaluated using the "three-step approach." Model fit was assessed using the Akaike and Bayesian Information Criteria, Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood ratio, posterior probabilities, and entropy values. RESULTS:Of 700 eligible patients, growth mixture modeling identified two recovery trajectories: 95.4% of patients (trajectory 1 [T1]) demonstrated steady improvement, while 4.6% (trajectory 2 [T2]) began with lower KOOS-JR scores (mean 9.7 vs. 47.9 for T1) but recovered to near T1 levels by 1 month. Trajectory 2 patients were markedly younger (mean 64 vs. 67 years), had higher Body Mass Index (36 vs. 31), included more Black or African American individuals (38% vs. 20%), and were more frequently discharged to rehabilitation facilities (16% vs. 3.3%; all P < 0.05). Each additional year of age reduced the likelihood of following T2 by 4% (odds ratio = 0.96, 95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 0.99; P = 0.016), while discharge to rehabilitation increased the likelihood 6-fold (odds ratio = 6.22, 95% confidence interval, 1.89 to 17.8; P = 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study identified two distinct recovery trajectories after TKA, with notably no trajectory emerging showing decline or stagnation from preoperative levels. Despite lower baseline scores, patients in T2 achieved substantial recovery, suggesting TKA provides meaningful improvement even for those with substantially compromised function. The findings also highlight the need to explore whether rehabilitation discharge directly influences the observed postoperative gains.

BACKGROUND:Patients' satisfaction and job limitations after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) based on occupation intensity have not been evaluated. This study aimed to assess patients' ability and satisfaction with their return to work following primary THA depending on intensity of their occupation. METHODS:This retrospective review surveyed patients undergoing primary THA between June 2011 and January 2022, with at least one year of follow-up, on return to work rates. Of 1,713 participants, 1,176 (68.7%) reported working prior to THA and were stratified into high intensity (HI) (i.e. laborer, construction), standard intensity (SI) (i.e. walking, climbing stairs), and low intensity (LI) (i.e. desk jobs) groups. Baseline demographics and survey responses were compared. Among patients who worked preoperatively, 66 (5.6%), 450 (38.3%), and 660 (56.1%) were in the HI, SI, and LI groups, respectively. RESULTS:High rates of workers across all groups reported improvements in their ability to work following THA, with 74.8% of SI, 68.8% of LI workers and 63.6% of HI workers reporting "remarkable" or "modest improvement." The HI group was more likely male, younger, and a current smoker compared to the SI and LI groups. Among LI workers, 47.2% returned within the first month and83.6% returned within two months. SI workers showed a similar pattern, with 36.2% returning in less than a month and 79.7% returning within two months. HI workers had a comparatively lower return rate, with 12.3% returning within the first month and 52.6% returning within two months. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Across all intensity levels, THA enables improvements in perceived work function and satisfaction. However, higher-intensity work requires more time, is more difficult, and yields lower return-to-work satisfaction compared to low-intensity work.

BACKGROUND:Robotic assistance (RA) is increasingly used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for more accurate bony resection and balancing. However, the impact of robotic TKA (RATKA) on clinical outcomes and patient-reported measures (PROMs) remains unclear. This study aims to compare RATKA and conventional TKA (CTKA) using a novel robotic system. METHODS:A retrospective review was conducted on 10,031 patients who underwent TKA from February 2021 to October 2024. 289 RATKAs were performed with a hand-held robotic system. These RATKA cases were 1:1 propensity-score matched to CTKA for patient demographics, surgeon, implant system, and articulation design. Postoperative and clinical outcomes including surgical time, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), debridement, reoperations and revisions were collected and analyzed. Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) included Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS, JR) and Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. RESULTS:RATKA demonstrated significantly shorter LOS (30.04 vs. 51.91 hours, p < 0.001, respectively) compared to CTKA. There was no difference in surgical time (107.18 vs. 106.22 minutes, p = 0.349). Although there was no statistical difference in 90-day ED visits, the majority of the CTKA revisits were due to surgery-related causes when compared to the RATKAs (1.38% vs. 0.34%, p = 0.239). While RATKAs had higher incidence of MUAs (2.07% vs. 0.34%, p = 0.201), CTKAs had more reoperations (1 vs. 0, p = 0.369) and more revisions than the RATKAs (6 vs. 0, p = 0.117). In terms of PROMs, both RATKAs and CTKAs showed similar improvements in KOOS, JR and PROMIS pain scores following TKA, with no significant differences in the magnitude of improvement at early postoperative timepoints. However, at the one-year follow-up, RATKA demonstrated significantly greater reduction in PROMIS pain intensity (Δ-9.12, p = 0.032) compared to CTKAs. CONCLUSIONS:This retrospective analysis showed that the novel RATKA resulted in reduced length of stay, fewer reoperations, and greater reduction in one-year PROMIS pain intensity compared to CTKAs, despite having a higher incidence of MUA rates. Further research is needed to clarify these differences clinically and enhance patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Sleep impairment following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is common and may decrease patient satisfaction and early recovery. Standardized postoperative recommendations for sleep disturbance have not been established. We aimed to assess whether melatonin use improves sleep quality and quantity in the acute period following THA. METHODS:Patients undergoing primary, elective THA between July 2021 and March 2024 were prospectively enrolled and randomized to receive either five mg of melatonin or a placebo nightly for 14 days postoperatively. Participants recorded nightly pain scores on the visual analog scale (VAS), the number of hours slept, and the number of nighttime awakenings in a sleep diary. Sleep disturbance was assessed preoperatively and on postoperative day (POD) 14 using the patient-reported outcome measurement information system sleep disturbance (PROMIS-SD) form. Epworth Sleepiness Scores (ESS) were collected to assess sleep quality and were the primary outcome of this study. Of the 139 patients who completed the study protocol, there were 64 patients in the placebo group and 75 patients in the melatonin group. RESULTS:Both groups demonstrated comparable postoperative ESS (melatonin: 6.0 ± 4.0; placebo: 6.8 ± 4.5, P = 0.35). Melatonin patients experienced significantly more hours slept on POD2 (6.5 ± 1.7; 5.7 ± 2.4, P = 0.017) and averaged over POD one to three (6.1 ± 1.6; 5.7 ± 2.0, P = 0.14), although this was not statistically significant. Fewer nighttime awakenings in the melatonin group were observed on POD two (2.7 ± 1.5; 3.1 ± 2.0, P = 0.28), although this was not statistically significant. The melatonin group demonstrated significantly lower postoperative PROMIS-SD scores (52.5 ± 9.3; 56.3 ± 9.2, P = 0.040). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Melatonin may not improve overall postoperative sleep quality following THA as measured by the ESS. Melatonin may promote sleep duration in the POD one to three period, although potential benefits wane after POD three. Melatonin is safe and can be considered for THA patients experiencing early postoperative sleep disturbance.