Robotic-Assisted versus Manually Implanted Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Clinical and Radiographic Comparison
Hadley, Christopher J; Grossman, Eric L; Mont, Michael A; Salem, Hytham S; Catani, Fabio; Marcovigi, Andrea
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Component positioning during THA is one of the more critical surgeon-controlled factors as malposition has been associated with higher rates of hip dislocations, poor biomechanics, accelerated wear rates, leg length discrepancies (LLDs), and revision surgeries. In order to reduce the rates of component malposition and improve surgical accuracy, robotic-assisted THA has developed increased interest. The primary objective of this study was to compare patient outcomes following THA using the Mako Stryker robotic system (Stryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, New Jersey) to outcomes in patients who underwent conventional instrumented THA. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Consecutive patients undergoing THA with a direct-lateral surgical approach from a single surgeon were reviewed. Patients were treated with either a robotic-arm assisted total hip arthroplasty (RTHA) or a conventional-instrumented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA). Minimum follow up was 16 months. RESULTS:Robotic-assisted THA significantly improved patient outcomes compared to conventional THA. No significant differences were observed in postoperative radiographic outcomes between the RTHA and CTHA cohorts. In our analysis, patients in the RTHA cohort compared to the CTHA cohort had significantly higher Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) (P<0.001) and Harris Hip Scores (P<0.05) at final follow up. There were no significant differences between the RTHA cohort and CTHA cohorts in regard to cup inclination (Â°) (P=0.10), hip length difference (mm) (P=0.80), hip length discrepancy (mm) (P=0.10), and global offset difference (mm) (P=0.20). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Further studies, particularly prospective randomized studies, are necessary to investigate the short- and long-term clinical outcomes, possible long-term complications, and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted THA in regard to improving outcomes and accuracy.
What Are Risk Factors for Infection after Primary or Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty in Patients Older Than 80 Years?
Sodhi, Nipun; Anis, Hiba K; Vakharia, Rushabh M; Acuña, Alexander J; Gold, Peter A; Garbarino, Luke J; Mahmood, Bilal M; Arnold, Nicholas R; Ehiorobo, Joseph O; Grossman, Eric L; Mont, Michael A; Roche, Martin W
BACKGROUND:Patients older than 80 years of age form an increasing proportion of the patient population undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA). With increasing life expectancy and the success of TJA, orthopaedic surgeons are more likely to operate on patients older than 80 years than ever before. Given that most other studies focus on younger populations, only evaluate primary TJA, or limit patient populations to institutional or regional data, we felt a large-database, nationwide analysis of this demographic cohort was warranted, and we wished to consider both primary and revision TJA. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES:In this study, we sought to investigate the risk factors for surgical site infections (SSIs) at 90 days and periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) at 2 years after surgery in patients aged 80 years and older undergoing (1) primary and (2) revision lower extremity TJA. METHODS:All patients aged 80 years or older who underwent primary or revision TJA between 2005 and 2014 were identified using the Medicare Analytical Files of the PearlDiver Supercomputer using ICD-9 codes. This database is unique in that it is one of the largest nationwide databases, and so it provides a large enough sample size of patients 80 years or older. Additionally, this database provides comprehensive and longitudinal patient data tracking, and a low error rate. Our final cohort consisted of 503,241 patients (TKA: n = 275,717; THA: n = 162,489; revision TKA: n = 28,779; revision THA: n = 36,256). Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate the association of risk factors on the incidences of 90-day SSI and 2-year PJI. Variables such as sex, diabetes, BMI, and congestive heart failure, were included in the multivariate regression models. Several high-risk comorbidities as identified by the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices were selected to construct the models. We performed a Bonferroni-adjusted correction to account for the fact that multiple statistical comparisons were made, with a p value < 0.002 being considered statistically significant. RESULTS:For primary TKA patients, an increased risk of 90-day SSIs was associated with male sex (OR 1.28 [95% CI 1.25 to 1.52]; p < 0.001), BMI greater than 25 k/m (p < 0.001), and other comorbidities. For primary THA patients, an increased risk of 90-day SSIs was associated with patients with obesity (BMI 30-39 kg/m; OR 1.91 [95% CI 1.60 to 2.26]; p < 0.001) and those with morbid obesity (BMI 40-70 kg/m; OR 2.58 [95% CI 1.95 to 3.36]; p < 0.001). For revision TKA patients, an increased risk of SSI was associated with iron-deficiency anemia (OR 1.82 [95% CI 1.37 to 2.28]; p < 0.001). For revision THA patients, electrolyte imbalance (OR 1.48 [95% CI 1.23 to 1.79]; p < 0.001) and iron-deficiency anemia (OR 1.63 [95% CI 1.35 to 1.99]; p < 0.001) were associated with an increased risk of 90-day SSI. Similar associations were noted for PJI in each cohort. CONCLUSIONS:These findings show that in this population, male sex, obesity, hypertension, iron-deficiency anemia, among other high-risk comorbidities are associated with a higher risk of SSIs and PJIs. Based on these findings, orthopaedic surgeons should actively engage in comanagement strategies with internists and other specialists to address modifiable risk factors through practices such as weight management programs, blood pressure reduction, and electrolyte balancing. Furthermore, this data should encourage healthcare systems and policy makers to recognize that this patient demographic is at increased risks for PJI or SSI, and these risks must be considered when negotiating payment bundles. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level III, therapeutic study.
Opioid Use Disorder Is Associated with an Increased Risk of Infection after Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Large Database Study
Sodhi, Nipun; Anis, Hiba K; Acuña, Alexander J; Vakharia, Rushabh M; Gold, Peter A; Garbarino, Luke J; Mahmood, Bilal M; Ehiorobo, Joseph O; Grossman, Eric L; Higuera, Carlos A; Roche, Martin W; Mont, Michael A
BACKGROUND:Recent studies have shown that patients with opioid use disorder have impaired immunity. However, few studies with large patient populations have evaluated the risks of surgical site infection (SSI) and prosthetic joint infection (PJI) with opioid use disorder after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and there is a lack of evidence for revision TJA in particular. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES:Are patients with opioid use disorder who undergo (1) primary THA, (2) primary TKA, (3) revision THA, or (4) revision TKA at a higher risk of experiencing SSIs 90 days after surgery or PJIs 2 years after surgery than those who do not have opioid use disorder? METHODS:All primary and revision TJAs performed between 2005 and 2014 were identified from the Medicare Analytical Files of the PearlDiver Supercomputer using ICD-9 codes. This database is one of the largest nationwide databases; it comprehensively and longitudinally tracks patients based on all insurance claims rather than particular hospital visits, and has a low error rate (estimated at 1.3%). Boolean command operators were used to form a study group of patients with a history of opioid use disorder before surgery. ICD-9 diagnosis codes 304.00 to 304.02 and 305.50 to 305.52 were used to identify patients with opioid use disorder. Study group patients were matched 1:1 to control participants without opioid use disorder undergoing TJA, according to age, sex, and comorbidity burden (Elixhauser comorbidity index [ECI]). The ECI is comprised of 31 different comorbidities and can be used for large administrative databases. The query yielded a study population of 54,332 patients: 14,944 undergoing primary THA (opioid use disorder: n = 7472), 23,680 undergoing primary TKA (opioid use disorder: n = 11,840), 8116 undergoing revision THA (opioid use disorder: n = 4058), and 7592 undergoing revision TKA (opioid use disorder: n = 3796). The primary outcomes analyzed were SSI at 90 days and PJI at 2 years postoperatively, which were identified with ICD-9 codes. Logistic regression analyses were performed to calculate the risk that an infection would develop in a patient with opioid use disorder compared with the matched control patients without opioid use disorder. RESULTS:Patients with opioid use disorder undergoing primary THA had an increased risk of SSI at 90 days (OR 1.85 [95% CI 1.51 to 2.25]; p < 0.001) and PJI at 2 years (OR 1.66 [95% CI 1.42 to 1.93]; p < 0.001). Compared with matched controls, opioid use disorder patients undergoing primary TKA had an increased risk of SSI at 90 days (OR 1.72 [95% CI 1.46 to 2.02]; p < 0.001) and PJI at 2 years (OR 1.31 [95% CI 1.16 to 1.47]; p < 0.001). Similarly, for revision THAs, there was an increase in 90-day SSIs (OR 1.89 [95% CI 1.53 to 2.32]; p < 0.001) and 2-year PJIs (OR 4.24 [95% CI 3.67 to 4.89]; p < 0.001). The same held for revision TKAs for 90-day SSIs (OR 1.88 [95% CI 1.53 to 2.29]; p < 0.001) and 2-year PJIs (OR 4.94 [95% CI 4.24 to 5.76]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:After accounting for age, sex, and comorbidity burden, these results revealed that patients with opioid use disorder undergoing TJA were at increased risk of having SSIs and PJIs. Based on these findings, healthcare systems and/or administrators should recognize the increased associated PJI and SSI risks in patients with opioid use disorder and enact clinical policies that reflect these associated risks. Additionally, these findings should encourage surgeons to pursue multidisciplinary approaches to help patients reduce their opioid consumption before their arthroplasty procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level III, therapeutic study.
The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Orthopedic Practices in New York
Mo, Andrew Z; Mont, Michael A; Grossman, Eric L; Rahman, Omar F; Murray, Daniel P; Hershman, Elliot B; Sgaglione, Nicholas A
The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) crisis has strained hospitals and health systems across the world. In the United States, New York City has faced a surge of cases as the epicenter of the North American outbreak. Northwell Health, as the largest regional health system in New York City, has implemented various practices and policies to adapt to the evolving situation and prepare for future global events. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(4):245-249.].
Two-Stage Treatment for Total Knee Arthroplasty Infection Utilizing an Articulating Prefabricated Antibiotic Spacer
Warth, Lucian C; Hadley, Christopher J; Grossman, Eric L
Periprosthetic joint infection represents a serious complication following total knee arthroplasty. In the setting of chronic or age-indeterminate total knee arthroplasty infection, a 2-staged approach has been traditionally the preferred method of treatment over single-stage debridement and reimplantation debridement or debridement, antibiotics and implant retention. Two-stage is the preferred treatment method in North America and has demonstrated better overall success than the single stage techniques. Additionally, the 2-stage method is the preferred treatment for difficult to treat pathogens as well as in patients who have already undergone a previous revision procedure. An articulating prefabricated antibiotic spacer has entered the armamentarium of 2-stage revision knee surgery, and has demonstrated comparable results to custom and static spacers in terms of the primary goal of infection control. Importantly, the potential for enhanced mobility and function hold promise by safely providing a more "livable" knee during the convalescent period prior to definitive reimplantation.
Mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty: better than a fixed-bearing?
Post, Zachary D; Matar, Wadih Y; van de Leur, Tim; Grossman, Eric L; Austin, Matthew S
The purported advantages of mobile-bearing knee include increased survivorship and restoration of more natural knee kinematics compared to a standard fixed-bearing design. To evaluate these claims, an extensive review of the available literature was undertaken. We compared survivorship and clinical function, including patient preference. We found no difference in survivorship at 12 to 23 years. Kinematic profiles of both designs did not differ significantly: rotation, flexion, and extension were comparable. Studies evaluating both designs in the same patient showed no difference in range of motion, knee preference, knee scores, and survivorship at midterm follow-up. Both designs were capable of producing excellent long-term results and clinical outcomes if properly implanted. The available evidence does not point to the superiority of one design over another in survivorship and clinical function.