Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:After home health care, the skilled nursing facility (SNF) is the most commonly used postacute care modality, among Medicare beneficiaries, after total joint arthroplasty. Prior studies demonstrated that a loss in postsurgical ambulatory gains is incurred in the interval between hospital discharge and arrival at the SNF. The aim of this present study is to determine the consequences of that loss in function, as well as compare SNF-related outcomes in patients with Medicare vs Managed Care (MC) insurance. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We conducted a retrospective analysis of 80 patients (54 Medicare and 26 MC) who attended an SNF after hospitalization for total joint arthroplasty. Outcomes from physical therapy records were abstracted from each patient's SNF file. Results/UNASSIGNED:There was an approximately 40% drop-off in gait achievements between hospital discharge and SNF admission. This decline in ambulation was significantly greater in Medicare patients (Medicare: 94.6 ± 123.2 ft, MC: 40.0 ± 48.9 ft, P = .034). Larger reductions in gait achievements between hospital discharge and SNF admission were significantly correlated with longer SNF lengths of stay and poorer gait achievements by SNF discharge. Patients with MC insurance made significant improvements in gait training at the SNF beyond that which was acquired at the hospital, whereas Medicare patients did not (PMedicare  = .28, PMC  = .003). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Large losses in motor function between hospital discharge and SNF admission were associated with poor functional outcomes and longer stays at the SNF. These effects were more pronounced in Medicare patients than those with MC insurance.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Implant price has been identified as a significant contributing factor to high costs associated with revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The goal of this study is to analyze the cost of implants used in rTKAs and to compare this pricing with 2 alternative pricing models. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Using our institutional database, we identified 52 patients from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014. Average cost of components for each case was calculated and compared to the total hospital cost for that admission. Costs for an all-component revision were then compared to a proposed "direct to hospital" (DTH) standardized pricing model and a fixed price revision option. Potential savings were calculated from these figures. Results/UNASSIGNED:On average, 28% of the total hospital cost was spent on implants for rTKA. The average cost for revision of all components was $13,640 and ranged from $3000 to $28,000. On average, this represented 32.7% of the total hospital cost. Direct to hospital implant pricing could potentially save approximately $7000 per rTKA, and the fixed pricing model could provide a further $1000 reduction per rTKA-potentially saving $8000 per case on implants alone. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Alternative implant pricing models could help lower the total cost of rTKA, which would allow hospitals to achieve significant cost containment.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Prosthetic joint infection continues to be a source of significant morbidity to patients and an economic burden to society as a whole. Two-stage revision is the current gold standard for treatment of periprosthetic joint infection in North America. Despite this, much discussion persists about treatment strategies surrounding the interim of the two-stage revision and treatment beyond reimplantation. The aim of this review is to answer some of these questions, specifically: are C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) helpful prior to reimplantation, is aspiration helpful, what is the role and timing for systemic antibiotics, and is there a role for oral suppression following second-stage reimplantation? METHODS:A literature review was completed in an attempt to address unanswered questions associated with two-stage reimplantation. Investigators' recommendations and current practices are described. RESULTS:ESR and CRP are less reliable in the interim of a two-stage revision than for diagnosis of infection in a primary total joint arthroplasty. There is inconclusive evidence regarding the utility of joint aspiration in two-stage revisions. Additionally, no evidence has been developed for length of IV antibiotic treatment after second-stage reimplantation, and in a few studies, oral antibiotic suppression has shown some benefit in reducing reinfection rates. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The question of optimum treatment strategies has yet to be answered: attempts are underway to obtain suitable data with multi-center studies and large patient populations. Periprosthetic joint infection is a serious and life altering complication and with continued research we can further clarify treatment strategies.

Postoperative radiographs remain the standard for assessment of component placement following total hip arthroplasty (THA), despite the known limitations of radiographs. Computed tomography (CT) scanning offers improved accuracy, but its costs and radiation exposure are prohibitive. The authors performed a cadaver study to compare the error associated with radiographs with that of CT scans following THA. The authors also compared imaging with a novel mini-navigation system. Three board-certified orthopedic surgeons each performed 4 THA procedures (6 cadavers, 12 hips) via the posterior approach using a mini-navigation tool to assist with component placement. Cup position from imaging was compared with corrected CT values for anteversion and inclination, created by correcting the initial scan to align the anterior pelvic plane coplanar with the CT table, thus representing cup position not distorted by imaging or positioning. Anteversion from standard CT scans was within 2.5° (standard deviation [SD], 1.5°) of reference values (P=.25); radiographs showed an average error of 7.8° (SD, 4.3°) vs reference values (all values absolute means) (P<.01). The mini-navigation system provided anteversion values within an average of 4.0° (SD, 4.0°) of reference anteversion (P<.01). Standard CT values for inclination were within 2.4° (SD, 2.0°) of reference values (P=.53), whereas radiographic inclination values were within 2.5° (SD, 2.3°) (P=.12). Mini-navigation values for inclination were within 3.9° (SD, 3.2°) of reference inclination (P=.26). This study demonstrated that cup position as measured by radiographs is significantly less accurate than CT scans and that the mini-navigation system provided anteversion measurements that were of comparable accuracy to CT scans. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(6):e952-e958.].

BACKGROUND: Accurate cup positioning is one of the most challenging aspects of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Undetected movement of the patient during THA surgery can lead to inaccuracies in cup anteversion and inclination, increasing the potential for dislocation and revision surgery. Investigations into the magnitude of patient motion during THA are not well represented in the literature. METHODS: We analyzed intraoperative pelvic motion using a novel navigation device used to assist surgeons with cup position, leg length, and offset during THA. This device uses an integrated accelerometer to measure motion in 2 orthogonal degrees of freedom. We reviewed the data from 99 cases completed between February and September 2016. RESULTS: The mean amount of pitch recorded per patient was 2.7 degrees (standard deviation, 2.2; range, 0.1 degrees -9.9 degrees ), whereas mean roll per patient was 7.3 degrees (standard deviation, 5.5; range, 0.3 degrees -31.3 degrees ). Twenty-one percent (21 of 99) of patients demonstrated pitch of >4 degrees . Sixty-nine percent (68 of 99) of patients demonstrated >4 degrees of roll, and 25% (25 of 99) of patients demonstrated roll of >/=10 degrees . CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that while the majority of intraoperative motion is <4 degrees , many patients experience significant roll, with a large proportion rolling >10 degrees . This degree of movement has implications for acetabular cup position, as failure to compensate for this motion can result in placement of the cup outside the planned safe zone, thus, increasing the potential for dislocation. Further study is warranted to determine the effect of this motion on cup position, leg length, and offset.

Background/UNASSIGNED:As medical management continues to improve, orthopaedic surgeons are likely to encounter a greater proportion of patients who have coinfection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis-C virus (HCV). Methods/UNASSIGNED:The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database was used to identify patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty between 2010 and 2014. Patients were stratified into 4 groups on the basis of HCV and HIV status. Differences regarding baseline demographics, length of stay, total charges, discharge disposition, in-hospital complications and mortality, and 90-day hospital readmission were calculated. Results/UNASSIGNED:Between 2010 and 2014, a total of 137,801 patients underwent total knee arthroplasty. Of those, 99.13% (136,604) of the population were not infected, 0.62% (851) had HCV monoinfection, 0.20% (278) had HIV monoinfection, and 0.05% (68) were coinfected with both HCV and HIV. Coinfected patients were more likely to be younger, female, a member of a minority group, homeless, and insured by Medicare or Medicaid, and to have a history of substance abuse. HCV and HIV coinfection was a significant independent risk factor for increased length of hospital stay (odds ratio [OR], 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75 to 4.81), total hospital charges in the 90th percentile (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.12 to 3.67), ≥2 in-hospital complications (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.97), and 90-day hospital readmission (OR, 3.53; 95% CI, 2.02 to 6.18). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Patients coinfected with both HCV and HIV represent a rare but increasing population of individuals undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Recognition of unique baseline demographics in these patients that may lead to suboptimal outcomes will allow appropriate preoperative management and multidisciplinary coordination to reduce morbidity and mortality while containing costs. Level of Evidence/UNASSIGNED:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Declining total joint arthroplasty reimbursement and rising implant prices have led many hospitals to restrict access to newer, more expensive total joint arthroplasty implants. The authors sought to understand arthroplasty surgeons' perspectives on implants regarding innovation, product launch, costs, and cost-containment strategies including surgeon gain-sharing and patient cost-sharing. Members of the International Congress for Joint Reconstruction were surveyed regarding attitudes about implant technology and costs. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed. A total of 126 surgeons responded from all 5 regions of the United States. Although 76.9% believed new products advance technology in orthopedics, most (66.7%) supported informing patients that new implants lack long-term clinical data and restricting new implants to a small number of investigators prior to widespread market launch. The survey revealed that 66.7% would forgo gain-sharing incentives in exchange for more freedom to choose implants. Further, 76.9% believed that patients should be allowed to pay incremental costs for "premium" implants. Surgeons who believed that premium products advance orthopedic technology were more willing to forgo gain-sharing (P=.040). Surgeons with higher surgical volume (P=.007), those who believed implant companies should be allowed to charge more for new technology (P<.001), and those who supported discussing costs with patients (P=.004) were more supportive of patient cost-sharing. Most arthroplasty surgeons believe technological innovation advances the field but support discussing the "unproven" nature of new implants with patients. Many surgeons support alternative payment models permitting surgeons and patients to retain implant selection autonomy. Most respondents prioritized patient beneficence and surgeon autonomy above personal financial gain. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(5):e825-e830.].

BACKGROUND: Significant attempts have been made to adopt practices to minimize blood transfusion after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) because of transfusion cost and potential negative clinical consequences including allergic reactions, transfusion-related lung injuries, and immunomodulatory effects. We aimed to evaluate risk factors for blood transfusion in a large cohort of TJA patients. METHODS: We used the all-payer California Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data from 2006 to 2011 to examine the trends in utilization of blood transfusion among arthroplasty patients (n = 320,746). We performed descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression clustered by hospital, controlling for Deyo-Charlson comorbidity index, age, insurance type (Medicaid vs others), gender, procedure year, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Eighteen percent (n = 59,038) of TJA patients underwent blood transfusion during their surgery, from 15% with single knee to 45% for bilateral hip arthroplasty. Multivariate analysis indicated that compared with the referent category of single knee arthroplasty, single hip had a significantly higher odds of blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR], 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-1.83), as did bilateral knee (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 3.20-3.98) and bilateral hip arthroplasty (OR, 6.17; 95% CI, 4.85-7.85). Increasing age (eg, age >/=80 years; OR, 2.99; 95% CI, 2.82-3.17), Medicaid insurance (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.27-1.45), higher comorbidity index (eg, score of >/=3; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 2.22-2.45), and females (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.70-1.80) all had significantly higher odds of blood transfusion after TJA. CONCLUSION: Primary hip arthroplasties have significantly greater risk of transfusion than knee arthroplasties, and bilateral procedures have even greater risk, especially for hips. These factors should be considered when evaluating the risk for blood transfusions.

BACKGROUND: Although HbA1c is commonly used for assessing glycemic control before surgery, there is no consensus regarding its role and the appropriate threshold in predicting adverse outcomes. This study was designed to evaluate the potential link between HbA1c and subsequent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), with the intention of determining the optimal threshold for HbA1c. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective study, which identified 1645 diabetic patients who underwent primary total joint arthroplasty (1004 knees and 641 hips) between 2001 and 2015. All patients had an HbA1c measured within 3 months of surgery. The primary outcome of interest was a PJI at 1 year based on the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Secondary outcomes included orthopedic (wound and mechanical complications) and nonorthopedic complications (sepsis, thromboembolism, genitourinary, and cardiovascular complications). A regression analysis was performed to determine the independent influence of HbA1c for predicting PJI. RESULTS: Overall 22 cases of PJI occurred at 1 year (1.3%). HbA1c at a threshold of 7.7 was distinct for predicting PJI (area under the curve, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.78). Using this threshold, PJI rates increased from 0.8% (11 of 1441) to 5.4% (11 of 204). In the stepwise logistic regression analysis, PJI remained the only variable associated with higher HbA1c (odds ratio, 1.5; confidence interval, 1.2-2.0; P = .0001). There was no association between high HbA1c levels and other complications assessed. CONCLUSION: High HbA1c levels are associated with an increased risk for PJI. A threshold of 7.7% seems to be more indicative of infection than the commonly used 7% and should perhaps be the goal in preoperative patient optimization.

BACKGROUND: Many cost drivers of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been critically evaluated to meet the heightened quality-associated expectations of performance-based care. However, assessing the efficacy of the different modalities of skin closure has been an underappreciated topic. The present study aims to provide further insight by conducting a meta-analysis and systematic review evaluating the rates of common complications and perioperative quality outcomes associated with different suture and staple skin closure techniques after TKA. METHODS: The present study was conducted in accordance with both the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Statement and the Cochrane Handbook for meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Primary outcome measures evaluated rates of common complications associated with primary TKA. Secondary outcome measures evaluated wound closure time, direct surgical costs, and cosmetic and knee function outcomes. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that skin sutures had a higher likelihood of superficial and deep infections, abscess formation, and wound dehiscence. Conversely, staples had a higher tendency for prolonged wound discharge. A systematic review of wound closure times and overall resource utilization demonstrated that wound closure was faster and more cost-effective with skin staples than sutures. CONCLUSION: Primary skin incision closure with staples demonstrated lower wound complications, decreased wound closure times, and an overall reduction in resource utilization. Given these outcomes, the use of staples after TKA may have several subtle clinical advantages over sutures.