Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The term "spinopelvic mobility" is most often applied to motion within the spinopelvic segment. It has also been used to describe changes in pelvic tilt between various functional positions, which is influenced by motion at the hip, knee, ankle and spinopelvic segment. In the interest of establishing a consistent language for spinopelvic mobility, we sought to clarify and simplify its definition to create consensus, improve communication, and increase consistency with research into the hip-spine relationship. METHODS:A literature search was performed using the Medline (PubMed) library to identify all existing articles pertaining to spinopelvic mobility. We reported on the varying definitions of spinopelvic mobility including how different radiographic imaging techniques are used to define mobility. RESULTS:The search term "spinopelvic mobility" returned a total of 72 articles. The frequency and context for the varying definitions of mobility were reported. 41 papers used standing and upright relaxed-seated radiographs without the use of extreme positioning, and 17 papers discussed the use of extreme positioning to define spinopelvic mobility. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our review suggests that the definitions of spinopelvic mobility is not consistent in the majority of published literature. We suggest descriptions of spinopelvic mobility independently consider spinal motion, hip motion, and pelvic position, while recognizing and describing their interdependence.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Aseptic loosening is a common cause of implant failure following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Cement penetration depth is a known factor that determines an implant's "strength" and plays an important role in preventing aseptic loosening. Tourniquet use is thought to facilitate cement penetration, but its use has mixed reviews. The aim of this study was to compare cement penetration depth between tourniquet and tourniquet-less TKA patients. METHODS:A multicenter retrospective review was conducted. Patients were randomized preoperatively to undergo TKA with or without the use of an intraoperative tourniquet. The variables collected were cement penetration measurements in millimeters (mm) within a 1-month post-operative period, length of stay (LOS), and baseline demographics. Measurements were taken by two independent raters and made in accordance to the zones described by the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System and methodology used in previous studies. RESULTS:A total of 357 TKA patients were studied. No demographic differences were found between tourniquet (n = 189) and tourniquet-less (n = 168) cohorts. However, the tourniquet cohort had statistically, but not clinically, greater average cement penetration depth [2.4 ± 0.6 mm (range 1.2-4.1 mm) vs. 2.2 ± 0.5 mm (range 1.0-4.3 mm, p = 0.01)]. Moreover, the tourniquet cohort had a significantly greater proportion of patients with an average penetration depth within the accepted zone of 2 mm or greater (78.9% vs. 67.3%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Tourniquet use does not affect average penetration depth but increases the likelihood of achieving optimal cement penetration depth. Further study is warranted to determine whether this increased likelihood of optimal cement penetration depth yields lower revision rates.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Prior studies have demonstrated an association between time to revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and indication; however, the impact of early versus late revision on post-operative outcomes has not been reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:A retrospective, observational study examined patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopedic hospital between 6/2011 and 4/2020 with > 1-year of follow-up. Patients were early revisions if they were revised within 2 years of primary TKA (pTKA) or late revisions if revised after greater than 2 years. Patient demographics, surgical factors, and post-operative outcomes were compared. RESULTS:470 rTKA were included (199 early, 271 late). Early rTKA patients were younger by 2.5 years (p = 0.002). The predominant indications for early rTKA were instability (28.6%) and arthrofibrosis/stiffness (26.6%), and the predominant indications for late rTKA were aseptic loosening (45.8%) and instability (26.2%; p < 0.001). Late rTKA had longer operative times (119.20 ± 51.94 vs. 103.93 ± 44.66 min; p < 0.001). There were no differences in rTKA type, disposition, hospital length of stay, all-cause 90-day emergency department visits and readmissions, reoperations, and number of re-revisions. CONCLUSIONS:Aseptic rTKA performed before 2 years had different indications but demonstrated similar outcomes to those performed later. Early revisions had shorter surgical times, which could be attributed to differences in rTKA indication. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III, retrospective observational analysis.

AIMS/UNASSIGNED:Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= -0.102; p = 0.251). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Multiply revised TKA had worse outcomes, with higher rates of facility discharge, longer operative times, and greater reoperation and re-revision rates compared to index rTKA.

This study sought to determine common complications and the rates of readmission and revision in total hip arthroplasty patients younger than 65 years. Using the American Joint Replacement Registry, we conducted a retrospective review of all THAs in patients aged 18 to 65 years from 2012 to 2020. We excluded patients aged older than 65 years, revisions, oncologic etiology, conversion from prior surgery, and nonelective cases. Primary outcomes included cumulative revision rate, 90-day readmission rate, and reason for revision. The Kaplan-Meier method and univariate analysis were used. Five thousand one hundred fifty-three patients were included. The average age was 56.7 years (SD 7.8 years), 51% were female, 85% were White, and 89% had a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 0 (1 = 7%, >2 = 4%). The mean follow-up was 39.57 months. Fifty-three patients (1.0%) underwent revision. Seventy-four patients (1.4%) were readmitted within 90 days. Revision was more common in Black patients (P = 0.023). Survivorship was 99% (95% confidence interval, 98.7 to 99.3) and 99% (95% confidence interval, 98.5 to 99.3) at 5 and 8 years, respectively. Infection (21%), instability (15%), periprosthetic fracture (15%), and aseptic loosening (9%) were the most common indications for revision. Total hip arthroplasty performed in young and presumed active patients had a 99% survivorship at 8 years. A long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate survival trends in this growing population.

The use of intraoperative technology (IT), such as computer-assisted navigation (CAN) and robot-assisted surgery (RA), in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasingly popular due to its ability to enhance surgical precision and reduce radiographic outliers. There is disputing evidence as to whether IT leads to better clinical outcomes and reduced postoperative pain. The purpose of this study was to determine if use of CAN or RA in TKA improves pain outcomes. This is a retrospective review of a multicenter randomized control trial of 327 primary TKAs. Demographics, surgical time, IT use (CAN/RA), length of stay (LOS), and opioid consumption (in morphine milligram equivalents) were collected. Analysis was done by comparing IT (n = 110) to a conventional TKA cohort (n = 217). When accounting for demographic differences and the use of a tourniquet, the IT cohort had shorter surgical time (88.77 ± 18.57 vs. 98.12 ± 22.53 minutes; p = 0.005). While postoperative day 1 pain scores were similar (p = 0.316), the IT cohort has less opioid consumption at 2 weeks (p = 0.006) and 1 month (p = 0.005) postoperatively, but not at 3 months (p = 0.058). When comparing different types of IT, CAN, and RA, we found that they had similar surgical times (p = 0.610) and pain scores (p = 0.813). Both cohorts had similar opioid consumption at 2 weeks (p = 0.092), 1 month (p = 0.058), and 3 months (p = 0.064) postoperatively. The use of IT in TKA does not yield a clinically significant reduction in pain outcomes. There was also no difference in pain or perioperative outcomes between CAN and RA technology used in TKA.

AIM/OBJECTIVE:Posterior stabilized (PS) and varus valgus constrained (VVC) knee polyethylene liners have been shown to confer excellent long-term functional results following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients who underwent rTKA using either a PS or VVC liner. METHODS:A retrospective comparative study of 314 rTKA with either PS or VVC liner and a minimum follow-up time of two years was conducted. Patient demographics, complications, readmissions, and re-revision etiology and rates were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed to estimate freedom from all-cause revision. RESULTS:Hospital LOS (3.41 ± 2.49 vs. 3.34 ± 1.93 days, p = 0.793) and discharge disposition (p = 0.418) did not significantly differ between groups. At a mean follow-up of 3.55 ± 1.60 years, the proportion of patients undergoing re-revision did not significantly differ (19.1% vs. 18.7%, p = 0.929). In subgroup analysis of re-revision causes, the VVC cohort had superior survival from re-revision due to instability compared to the PS cohort (97.8% vs. 89.4%, p = 0.003). Freedom from re-revision due to aseptic loosening did not significantly differ between groups (85.2% vs. 78.8%, p = 0.436). Improvements in range of motion (ROM) from preoperative to latest follow-up were similar as well. CONCLUSIONS:PS and VVC liners confer similar survivorship, complication rates, and overall knee ROM in rTKA. VVC liners were not associated with increased postoperative aseptic loosening and demonstrated superior freedom from re-revision due to instability. Future studies with longer follow-up are warranted to better determine significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two bearing options. LEVEL III EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective Cohort Study.

Accurate and reproducible acetabular component positioning is among the most important technical factors affecting outcomes of total hip arthroplasty. Although several studies have investigated the influence of pelvic tilt and obliquity on functional acetabular anteversion, the effect of pelvic axial rotation has not yet been established. We analyzed a generic simulated pelvis created using preoperative full-body standing and sitting radiographs. A virtual acetabulum was placed in 144 different scenarios of acetabular anteversion and abduction angles. In each scenario, the effects of pelvic tilt and pelvic axial rotation on different combinations of acetabular orientations were assessed. The change in acetabular anteversion was 0.75° for each 1° of pelvic tilt and was most linear in abduction angles of 40°±45°. The change in acetabular anteversion was 0.8° for each 1° of pelvic axial rotation. Surgeons may consider adjusting acetabular anteversion in fixed axial pelvic deformities when the degree of deformity affects functional acetabular positioning, assessed from preoperative standing and sitting weight-bearing radiographs. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):e27-e30.].

Non-English-speaking patients face increased communication barriers when undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Surgeons may learn or have proficiency in languages spoken among their patients to improve communication. This study investigated the effect of surgeon-patient language concordance on outcomes after TJA. We conducted a single-institution, retrospective review of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) whose preferred language was not English. Patients were stratified based on whether their surgeon spoke their preferred language (language concordant [LC]) or not (language discordant [LD]). Baseline characteristics, length of stay, discharge disposition, revision rate, readmission rate, and patient-reported outcomes (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement [KOOS, JR], Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement [HOOS, JR], and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]) were compared. A total of 3390 patients met inclusion criteria, with 855 receiving THA and 2535 receiving TKA. Among patients receiving THA, 440 (51.5%) saw a LC provider and 415 (48.5%) saw a LD provider. Those in the LC group had higher HOOS, JR scores at 1 year postoperatively (67.4 vs 49.3, P=.003) and were more likely to be discharged home (77.5% vs 69.9%, P=.013). Among patients receiving TKA, 1051 (41.5%) received LC care, whereas 1484 (58.5%) received LD care. There were no differences in outcome between the LC and LD TKA groups. Patients receiving THA with surgeons who spoke their language had improved patient-reported outcomes and were more commonly discharged home after surgery. Language concordance did not change outcomes in TKA. Optimizing language concordance for patients receiving TJA may improve postoperative outcomes. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(6):334-339.].