Faculty Bibliography

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: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.

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.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:A two-stage revision has long been the gold standard for chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJI), with real-component articulating spacers becoming overwhelmingly popular. While several studies have evaluated the success of these spacers in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), to our knowledge, this is the first to specifically compare outcomes of spacers stratified by the level of liner constraint. METHODS:This retrospective analysis reviewed 135 patients who were indicated for two-stage rTKA due to PJI between 2011 and 2023 at a single specialty urban academic institution. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the polyethylene liner constraint used during the first stage: cruciate retaining (CR), posterior stabilized (PS), and varus-valgus constrained (VVC). Of these 135 patients, 60 (44%) were categorized in the CR group, 47 (35%) were in the PS group, and 28 (21%) were in the VVC group. These groups were compared after each stage for peri- and postoperative outcomes such as operative time, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, knee range of motion (ROM), as well as incidence of re-revision and reinfection. RESULTS:The mean postoperative LOS was not different among cohorts for both stages. Operative time was significantly longer in the VVC group after the second stage (P = 0.007), while there was no difference after the first stage (P = 0.085). There were no differences in ROM after both stages. The mean ROM after the first stage was 92° in the CR group, 90° in the PS group, and 85° in the VVC group (P = 0.46). After the second stage, ROM was 101° in both the CR and VVC groups and 107° in the PS group (P = 0.28). There were no differences in the risk of re-revision due to re-infection across the groups after the first or second stage procedures. The re-infection incidence after the first stage was 14% in the VVC group, compared to 5% in the CR group and 4% in the PS group (P = 0.14). After the second stage, the reinfection risk was 21% in the VVC group, 8% in the CR group, and 13% in the PS group (P = 0.21). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:No significant differences were observed in the risk of complications such as re-infection, re-revisions, and postoperative ROM, suggesting that the choice of liner constraint in two-stage revision can be left up to surgeon's discretion.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Maintaining follow-up after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is critical to monitor patient outcomes and complications. However, patient factors associated with follow-up compliance have not been described previously. This study aimed to characterize demographic and perioperative characteristics associated with TJA follow-up compliance. METHODS:This was a retrospective review of all primary, elective total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) procedures at an urban, tertiary care center from 2011 to 2022. Patient follow-ups were categorized as early (0 to 90 days), mid-term (91 days to two years), and late-term (greater than two years). Patient characteristics, including age, sex, race, smoking status, spoken language, body mass index, income class, insurance type, distance from hospital, 90-day readmission, American Society of Anesthesia Status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), were compared at each period, and logistic regression identified predictors of follow-up. RESULTS:In total, 2,836 TKA and 3,056 THA procedures were analyzed, with overall follow-up rates of 78.9 and 76.8%, respectively. Among all TJA patients, those who did not have follow-up were more likely to be younger, men, White, active smokers, live further from the hospital, and have lower CCIs. Uniquely, for TKA patients, higher income status predicted lower overall and early follow-up rates, while English-speaking predicted lower early and higher late follow-up rates in this subgroup. Differences between groups based on follow-up status decreased as follow-up time increased. Regression analyses showed loss to follow-up increased with increased distance from the hospital and current smoking. Uniquely, for THA, men predicted loss-to-follow-up. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Younger age, men, White race, higher income, current smoking, and increased distance from the hospital are associated with increased early, but not late, loss to follow-up after TJA. Future studies should assess the influence of other factors, including home support and telemedicine use, on follow-up rates.

AIMS/UNASSIGNED:The aim of this study was to assess the variations in the positioning of components between sides in patients who underwent staged bilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA), and whether these variations affected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review included 207 patients who underwent staged bilateral THA between June 2017 and November 2022. Leg length, the height and anteversion of the acetabular component, and the coronal and sagittal angles of the femoral component were assessed radiologically and compared with the contralateral THA. The effect of the surgical approach and the technology used on this variation was also assessed. Linear regression was used to investigate the variations between the two THAs and the PROMs. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Between the two sides, the mean leg length varied by 4.6 mm (0.0 to 21.2), the mean height of the acetabular component varied by 3.3 mm (0.0 to 13.7), the mean anteversion varied by 8.2° (0.0° to 28.7°), the mean coronal alignment of the femoral component varied by 1.1° (0.0° to 6.9°), and the mean sagittal alignment varied by 2.3° (0.0° to 10.5°). The use of the direct anterior approach resulted in significantly more variation in the alignment of the femoral component in both the coronal (1.3° vs 1.0°; p = 0.036) and sagittal planes (2.8° vs 2.0°; p = 0.012) compared with the use of the posterior approach. The posterior approach generally led to more anteversion of the acetabular component than the anterior approach. The use of robotics or navigation for positioning the acetabular compoment did not increase side-to-side variations in acetabular component-related positioning or leg length. Despite considerable side-to-side variations, the mean Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome, Joint Replacement (HOOS JR) score was not affected by variations in the postioning of the components. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Staged bilateral THA resulted in considerable variation in the positioning of the components between the two sides. The direct anterior approach led to more variations in anteversion of the acetabular component and sagittal alignment of the femoral component than the posterior approach. The use of computer navigation and robotics did not improve the consistency of the positioning of the components in bilateral THA. Variations in the positioning of the components was not associated with differences in PROMs, indicating that patients can tolerate these differences.