Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study is to assess whether racial differences influence patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following primary total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent primary THA or TKA from 2016 to 2020 with available PROMs. Both THA and TKA patients were separated into three groups based on their ethnicity: Caucasian, African-American, and other races. Patient demographics, clinical data, and PROMs at various time-periods were collected and compared. Demographic differences were assessed using chi-square and ANOVA. Univariate ANCOVA was utilized to compare outcomes and PROMs while accounting for demographic differences. Results/UNASSIGNED:This study included 1999 THA patients and 1375 TKA patients. In the THA cohort, 1636 (82%) were Caucasian, 177 (9%) were African-American, and 186 (9%) were of other races. In the TKA cohort, 864 (63%) were Caucasian, 236 (17%) were African-American, and 275 (20%) were of other races. Surgical-time significantly differed between the groups that underwent THA (88.4vs.100.5vs.96.1; p < 0.001) with African-Americans requiring the longest operative time. Length-of-stay significantly differed in both THA (1.5vs.1.9vs.1.8; p < 0.001) and TKA (2.1vs.2.5vs.2.3; p < 0.001) cohorts, with African-Americans having the longest stay. Caucasians reported significantly higher PROM scores compared to non-Caucasians in both cohorts. All-cause emergency-department (ED) visits, 90-day postoperative events (readmissions&revisions), and discharge-disposition did not statistically differ in both cohorts. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Non-Caucasian patients demonstrated lower PROM scores when compared to Caucasian patients following TJA although the differences may not be clinically relevant. LOS was significantly longer for African-Americans in both THA and TKA cohorts. Further investigation identifying racial disparity interventions is warranted. Level of evidence/UNASSIGNED:Prognostic Level III.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:The COVID-19 pandemic led to a swift adoption of telehealth in orthopaedic surgery. This study aimed to analyze the satisfaction of patients and surgeons with the rapid expansion of telehealth at this time within the division of adult reconstructive surgery at a major urban academic tertiary hospital. METHODS:A total of 334 patients underging arthroplasty of the hip or knee who completed a telemedicine visit between 30 March and 30 April 2020 were sent a 14-question survey, scored on a five-point Likert scale. Eight adult reconstructive surgeons who used telemedicine during this time were sent a separate 14-question survey at the end of the study period. Factors influencing patient satisfaction were determined using univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression modelling. RESULTS:A total of 68 patients (20.4%) and 100% of the surgeons completed the surveys. Patients were "Satisfied" with their telemedicine visits (4.10/5.00 (SD 0.98)) and 19 (27.9%) would prefer telemedicine to in-person visits in the absence of COVID-19. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression modelling revealed that patients were more likely to be satisfied if their surgeon effectively responded to their questions or concerns (odds ratio (OR) 3.977; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.260 to 13.190; p = 0.019) and if their visit had a high audiovisual quality (OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.052 to 6.219; p = 0.042). Surgeons were "Satisfied" with their telemedicine experience (3.63/5.00 (SD 0.92)) and were "Fairly Confident" (4.00/5.00 (SD 0.53)) in their diagnostic accuracy despite finding the physical examinations to be only "Slightly Effective" (1.88/5.00 (SD 0.99)). Most adult reconstructive surgeons, seven of eight (87.5%) would continue to use telemedicine in the future. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):196-204.

Background/UNASSIGNED:An adult reconstruction (AR) fellowship is designed to provide advanced training for a broad range of primary reconstructive and complex knee revision surgeries. This study aims to identify outcome differences between primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed by AR fellowship-trained surgeons and non-AR (NAR) fellowship-trained surgeons. Material and Methods/UNASSIGNED:-tests. Primary outcomes were compared using multilinear regressions, controlling for demographic differences. Results/UNASSIGNED:< .001) scores were significantly higher for the AR cohort but did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:This study demonstrates significantly shorter surgical times and greater improvements in KOOS, JR and VR-12 PCS scores associated with TKAs performed by AR fellowship-trained surgeons. Level III Evidence/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective Cohort Study.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Intra-articular corticosteroid (CSI) or hyaluronic acid (HAI) injections alleviate symptoms of osteoarthritis in patients who may be candidates for total hip or total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). However, their effect on time to total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and complications remains uncertain. We sought to evaluate (1) delay in time to surgery for patients receiving injections prior to THA/TKA (2) incidence of patients that receive injections, (3) type and number of injections, and (4) compare complication rates between patients with and without injections. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We retrospectively reviewed 3340 consecutive TJA (1770 THA and 1570 TKA). Patients were divided into two cohorts depending if they received preoperative intra-articular injection or not. We identified dates of first clinic presentation and index surgery, injection type, total administered, and 90-day complications, including periprosthetic joint infection. Results/UNASSIGNED:150/1770 THA and 192/1570 TKA patients received injections (8.5%vs.12.2%,p = 0.0004). Time from first presentation to clinic to TJA was significantly greater in patients receiving injections [12.4 ± 11 months vs.7.3 ± 10.7,p < 0.001 for THA; 20.0 ± 17.4 months vs.11.6 ± 15.4,p < 0.001 for TKA]. This delay in time was greater in TKA versus THA (8.4 months vs.5.1,p < 0.001). TKA patients had a higher incidence of receiving HAI versus THA patients (9%vs.0.6%,p < 0.0001). There were no differences in overall complication profiles (p = 0.19 for THA, p = 0.3 for TKA). Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Injections are associated with an increased time to TJA by a statistically significant amount, however its clinical significance is debatable. Injections are safe if administered at least three months preoperatively. If patients present with appropriate surgical indications and are ready, we do not recommend intra-articular injections to delay surgery.

BACKGROUND:While vancomycin powder and dilute povidone-iodine (VIP) is associated with fewer total joint arthroplasty (TJA) periprosthetic joint infections (PJI), its effect on PJI organism profiles is unclear. This study evaluates primary TJA PJI organism profiles before and after the implementation of a VIP protocol. METHODS:In total, 18,299 primary TJAs performed at a university-affiliated, not-for-profit orthopedic hospital from before (1/2012-12/2013) and after (1/2016-12/2019) a VIP protocol was initiated were reviewed to identify deep PJIs that occurred within 90 days of the index arthroplasty as defined by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines. Demographics, overall organism incidence (n/TJAs), and relative organism incidence (n/PJIs) from the two cohorts were compared. RESULTS:In total, 103 TJA PJIs were identified (pre-VIP: 32/3982; VIP: 71/14,317). Following the introduction of VIP, the overall and relative incidence of coagulase-negative staphylococcal TJA PJIs significantly decreased (overall: 0.20% to 0.04%, P = .004; relative: 25.00% to 8.45%, P = .031). In response, the relative incidence of MSSA TJA PJIs significantly increased (18.75% to 40.85%, P = .042). Broken down by arthroplasty type, VIP was associated with a significantly lower overall incidence of coagulase-negative staphylococcal total knee arthroplasty (TKA) PJIs (0.27% to 0.06%, P = .015), a significantly lower overall incidence of MRSA TKA PJIs (0.18% to 0.03%, P = .031), and a nonsignificant decrease in the overall incidence of gram-negative TKA PJIs (0.18% to 0.04%, P = .059). No organism profile changes were found in total hip arthroplasty PJIs. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:VIP is not associated with more difficult to treat primary TJA PJIs. While promising, these findings require a prospective randomized controlled trial for confirmation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, Retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND:The most common treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a 2-stage revision. Few studies have compared different articulating spacer constructs. This study compares the outcomes of real-component and all-cement articulating spacers for TKA PJI treatment. METHODS:This retrospective observational study examined the arthroplasty database at 3 academic hospitals for articulating spacers placed for TKA PJIs between April 2011 and August 2020. Patients were categorized as receiving a real-component or an all-cement articulating spacer. Data on demographics, surgical information, and outcomes were collected. RESULTS:One-hundred sixty-four spacers were identified: 72 all-cement and 92 real-component spacers. Patients who received real-component spacers were older (67 ± 10 vs 63 ± 12 years; P = .04) and more likely to be former smokers (50.0% vs 28.6%; P = .02). Real-component spacers had greater range of motion (ROM) after Stage 1 (84° ± 28° vs 58° ± 28°; P < .01) and shorter hospital stays after Stage 1 (5.8 ± 4.3 vs 8.4 ± 6.8 days; P < .01). There was no difference in time to reimplantation, change in ROM from pre-Stage 1 to most recent follow-up, or reinfection. Real-component spacers had shorter hospital stays (3.3 ± 1.7 vs 5.4 ± 4.9 days; P < .01) and operative times during Stage 2 (162.2 ± 47.5 vs 188.0 ± 66.0 minutes; P = .01). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Real-component spacers had improved ROM after Stage 1 and lower blood loss, shorter operative time, and shorter hospital stays after Stage 2 compared to all-cement articulating spacers. The 2 spacer constructs had the same ultimate change in ROM and no difference in reinfection rates, indicating that both articulating spacer types may be safe and effective options for 2-stage revision TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III, retrospective observational analysis.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study is to describe a Level 1 Trauma Center's orthopedic response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to compare outcomes of acute fracture patients pre-COVID versus during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:All inpatient fracture cases performed over a 5-month period were identified and retrospective chart review performed. Patients were divided into pre- and COVID-era groups based on when surgery was performed relative to March 16, 2020 (the date elective operations were ceased), and groups were statistically compared. Patients with a COVID test result were further sub-divided into COVID negative and positive groups, and statistically compared. Statistical analysis was performed using independent t-test for continuous variables and chi-square analysis for categorical variables. RESULTS:One hundred and nineteen patients were identified, 38% females with average age of 58 years. Average length of stay was 7 days with average time from injury to surgery of 3 days and average time from admission to surgery of 1.3 days. Overall in-hospital complication rate was 29.4%, and 30-day mortality and readmission rates were 2.5% and 5%, respectively. Sixty-nine patients comprised the pre-COVID group, and 50 in the COVID-era group. There was no significant difference with respect to length of stay, time from injury to surgery, time from admission to surgery, need for post-operative ICU stay, in-hospital complication rate, 30-day mortality rate and 30-day readmission rate. Thirty-four patients had COVID testing, with 24 negative and 10 positive. COVID-positive patients had longer time from injury to surgery (8.5 days vs. 2 days, p = 0.003) and longer time from admission to surgery (2.7 days vs. 1.2 days, p = 0.034). While more COVID-positive patients required ICU admission post-operatively (60% vs. 21%, p = 0.036), there was no difference in overall complication rate. CONCLUSIONS:Orthopedic care of acute fracture patients was not affected by a global pandemic. The response of our Level 1 Trauma Center's orthopedic department can guide other hospitals if and when new surges in COVID cases arise, in order to prevent compromising appropriate orthopedic care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic III.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:There is debate regarding whether the use of computer-assisted technology, such as navigation and robotics, has any benefit on outcomes or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aims to report on the association between intraoperative use of technology and outcomes in patients who underwent primary TKA. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 7096 patients who underwent primary TKA from 2016-2020. Patients were stratified depending on the technology utilized: navigation, robotics, or no technology. Patient demographics, clinical data, Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS), and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) were collected at various time points up to 1-year follow-up. Demographic differences were assessed with chi-square and ANOVA. Clinical data and PROMs were compared using univariate ANCOVA, controlling for demographic differences. RESULTS:A total of 287(4%) navigation, 367(5%) robotics, and 6442(91%) manual cases were included. Surgical-time significantly differed between the three groups (113.33 vs 117.44 vs 102.11; P < .001). Discharge disposition significantly differed between the three groups (P < .001), with more manual TKA patients discharged to a skilled nursing facility (12% vs 8% vs 15%; P < .001) than those who had technology utilized. FJS scores did not statistically differ at three-months (P = .067) and one-year (P = .221). We found significant statistical differences in three-month KOOS, JR scores (59.48 vs 60.10 vs 63.64; P = .001); however, one-year scores did not statistically differ between all groups (P = .320). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates shorter operative-time in cases with no utilization of technology and clinically similar PROMs associated with TKAs performed between all modalities. While the use of technology may aid surgeons, it has not currently translated to better short-term outcomes. LEVEL III EVIDENCE/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND:Vancomycin powder and dilute povidone-iodine lavage (VIP) was introduced to reduce the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in high-risk total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. We hypothesize that VIP can reduce the incidence of early PJI in all primary TKA patients, regardless of preoperative risk. METHODS:An infection database of primary TKAs performed before a VIP protocol was implemented (January 2012-December 2013), during a time when only high-risk TKAs received VIP (January 2014-December 2015), and when all TKAs received VIP (January 2016-September 2019) at an urban, university-affiliated, not-for-profit orthopedic hospital was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with PJI. Criteria used for diagnosis of PJI were the National Healthcare Safety Network and Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines. RESULTS:VIP reduced early primary TKA PJI incidence in both the high-risk and all-risk cohorts compared with the pre-VIP cohort by 44.6% and 56.4%, respectively (1.01% vs 0.56% vs 0.44%, P = .0088). In addition, after introducing VIP to all-risk TKA patients, compared with high-risk TKA patients, the relative risk of PJI dropped an additional 21.4%, but this finding did not reach statistical significance (0.56% vs 0.44%, P = .4212). There were no demographic differences between the 3 VIP PJI cohorts. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:VIP is associated with a reduced early PJI incidence after primary TKA, regardless of preoperative risk. With the literature supporting its safety and cost-effectiveness, VIP is a value-based intervention, but given the nature of this historical cohort study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial is underway to definitively confirm its efficacy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Surgeons must rely on manufacturers to provide an appropriate distribution of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) sizes. There is a lack of literature regarding current appropriateness of tibial sizing schemes according to sex. As such, a study was devised assessing the adequacy of off-the-shelf tibial component size availability according to sex. METHODS:A search was conducted to identify all primary TKAs between July 2012 and June 2019 performed using a single implant. Baseline patient characteristics were collected (age, weight, height, BMI, and race). Two cohorts were created according to patient sex. Tibial sizes for each cohort were collected. Tibial component bar graph and histogram were created according to component sizes. Skewness and kurtosis were calculated for each distribution. Overhang was noted and measured radiographically. RESULTS:A total of 864 patients were identified, 38.7% males and 61.3% females. Most patients were Caucasian, and BMI was similar between cohorts. Tibial size distribution for males was as follows: 0.3% C, 4.8% D, 16.5% E, 40.1% F, 31.4% G, 6.9% H. Tibial size distribution for females was as follows: 30.8% C, 42.8% D, 23.0% E, 2.6% F, 0.8% G, 0.0% H. Histograms and normal curves demonstrated a fairly symmetric distribution of sizes for males (skewness = - 0.31, kurtosis = - 0.03). The distribution for females was positively skewed (skewness = 0.57, kurtosis = 0.12). Overall, overhang was noted in 16.6% of all size C tibias. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study highlight an implant-specific discrepancy in size availability affecting female patients which could result in inferior outcomes. The authors urge manufacturers to critically assess current implant size distribution availability to ensure both genders are adequately, and equally represented. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:IV.