Faculty Bibliography

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a rare, but serious complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Current VTE guidelines recommend pharmacologic agents with or without intermittent pneumatic compression devices (IPCDs). At our institution, both 81-mg aspirin (ASA) twice a day (BID) and portable IPCDs were previously prescribed to TKA patients at standard risk for VTE, but the IPCDs were discontinued and patients were treated with ASA alone going forward. The aim of this study is to determine if discontinued use of outpatient IPCDs is safe and does not increase the rate of VTE or any other related complications in patients following TKA. A retrospective review of 2,219 consecutive TKA cases was conducted, identifying patients with VTE, bleeding complications, infection, and mortality within 90 days postoperatively. Patients were divided into two cohorts. Patients in cohort one received outpatient IPCDs for a period of 14 days (control), while those in cohort two did not (ASA alone). All study patients received inpatient IPCDs and were maintained on 81-mg ASA BID for 28 days. A posthoc power analysis was performed using a noninferiority margin of 0.25 (α = 0.05; power = 80%), which showed that our sample size was fully powered for noninferiority for our reported deep vein thrombosis (DVT) rates, but not for pulmonary embolism (PE) rates. A total of 867 controls and 1,352 patients treated with ASA alone were identified. Only two control patients were diagnosed with a PE (0.23%), while one patient in the ASA alone group had DVT (0.07%). There was no statistical difference between these rates (p = 0.33). Furthermore, no differences were found in bleeding complications (p = 0.12), infection (p = 0.97), or 90-day mortality rates (p = 0.42) between both groups. The discontinued use of outpatient portable IPCDs is noninferior to outpatient IPCD use for DVT prophylaxis. Our findings suggest that this protocol change may be safe and does not increase the rate of VTE in standard risk patients undergoing TKA while using 81-mg ASA BID.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to identify common complications and the rates of readmission and revision in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients younger than 65 years. METHODS:Using the American Joint Replacement Registry, we conducted a retrospective review of all TKAs done in patients aged 18 to 65 years from 2012 to 2020. Demographic factors such as age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and preoperative Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Physical Component Summary (VR-12 PCS) scores were collected. We excluded patients older than 65 years and revision, oncologic, and nonelective cases. Primary outcomes included cumulative revision rate, 90-day readmission rate, and reason for revision. Univariate analysis and the Kaplan-Meier method were used. RESULTS:Six thousand one hundred seventy-nine patients were included. The average age was 58.8 years (SD 5.5 years), 61% were female, 82% were White, and 88% had a CCI of 0 (1 = 8% and ≥2 = 4%). The mean follow-up was 42.51 months. Seventy-four patients (1.2%) underwent revision. Sixty-nine patients (1.1%) were readmitted within 90 days. No factors assessed increased revision rates. Revision-free survivorship was 98.7% (95% CI 98.4 to 99.0) and 98.6% (95% CI 98.2 to 99.0) at 5 and 8 years, respectively. Infection (15%), aseptic loosening (14%), and instability (12%) were the most common indications for revision. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:TKA done in young and presumed active patients has excellent survivorship. Long-term follow-up is needed to assess survival trends in this growing population.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Isolated head and liner exchange in aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is an appealing option rather than full acetabular component revision; however, early outcome reports suggest high rates of complications requiring re-revision. This study seeks to compare the outcomes of these procedures. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This retrospective study assessed 124 head and liner exchanges and 59 full acetabular cup revisions conducted at a single center between 2011 and 2019 with at least 2 years of follow-up. Baseline demographics did not vary by group. Mean follow-up was 3.7 (range 2.0-8.6) years. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:0.22) were associated with failure within 2 years. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:In this analysis, 2-year outcomes for isolated head and liner exchange were non-inferior to full acetabular component revision. A future randomised prospective study should be conducted to better assess the optimal approach to revision in an aseptic failed hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Computer-assisted navigation systems (CAS) are increasingly being integrated into total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures, but perceptions of associated learning curve and increased operative time continue to curtail uptake. Newer-generation navigational systems aim to streamline integration into surgical workflow to mitigate increases in operative time. Here, we assess the impact of a novel imageless CAS on operative time for TKA. METHODS:A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of a cohort of patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA with one of three surgeons between October 2019 and March 2020 was conducted. Consecutive cases using a novel imageless CAS were included in analysis. For each surgeon, average operative time was recorded and compared in sequential five-case cohorts to average operative time for the same procedure performed conventionally using a two-tailed t test. RESULTS:Average conventional operative times were 95.9 ± 15.0, 86.6 ± 13.7, and 116.9 ± 25.1 min for the three surgeons. Initial CAS-assisted operative times increased to 107.0 ± 9.8 (p = 0.07) and 102.4 ± 13.2 (p = 0.06) min for Surgeons 1 and 2 and decreased to 113.2 ± 9.8 min (p = 0.52) for Surgeon 3. Most recent CAS-assisted operative times were 94.8 ± 13.9 (p = 0.88), 88.7 ± 15.3 (p = 0.84), and 104.8 ± 13.2 (p = 0.12) min as compared to pre-CAS. Absolute differences for the most recent navigated procedures ranged from 12.1 min faster to 2.0 min slower. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The learning curve for TKA navigation may be as few as 10 cases, and any associated increases in operative time may be transient and non-significant. Moreover, navigation may ultimately speed operative time, perhaps as the result of enhanced intraoperative assessment of alignment.

The Risk Assessment Prediction Tool (RAPT) predicts discharge disposition after total joint arthroplasty with only 75% accuracy. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether higher accuracy can be achieved with basic electronic health record (EHR) data combined with machine learning (ML) algorithms. Three ML analysis models were developed: model 1 (M1) evaluated the accuracy of predicted discharge disposition in concordance with the RAPT; model 2 (M2) used the RAPT questionnaire to develop an ML algorithm to predict the likelihood of discharge to home vs facility; and model 3 (M3) was developed with non-RAPT data (age, surgeon, and discharge preference) with the same ML training process as M2. Evaluation metrics included accuracy for home discharge (HD), positive predictive value for HD (PPV-HD), negative predictive value for HD (NPV-HD), sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). A total of 1405 patients were included. With M1, the overall accuracy for HD was 83.5%, PPVHD was 92.1%, NPV-HD was 45%, sensitivity was 0.88, and specificity was 0.56. With M2, the overall accuracy for HD decreased to 82.8%, PPV-HD was 91.7%, NPV-HD was 43.1%, sensitivity was 0.87, specificity was 0.53, and mean AUROC was 0.87±0.03. With M3, overall accuracy for HD increased to 90.3%, PPV-HD was 95.2%, NPV-HD was 68.6%, sensitivity was 0.93, specificity was 0.76, and AUROC was 0.91±0.02. The use of basic EHR data combined with ML can exceed the accuracy of the RAPT. Applying big data on an individual level for this purpose may allow for safer and more appropriate discharge planning. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(4):e211-e215.].

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Navigated total knee arthroplasty (TKA) improves implant alignment by providing feedback on resection parameters based on femoral and tibial cutting guide positions. However, saw blade thickness, deflection, and cutting guide motion may lead to final bone cuts differing from planned resections, potentially contributing to suboptimal component alignment. We used an imageless navigation device to intraoperatively quantify the magnitude of error between planned and actual resections, hypothesizing final bone cuts will differ from planned alignment. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:A retrospective study including 60 consecutive patients undergoing primary TKA using a novel imageless navigation device was conducted. Device measurements of resection parameters were obtained via attachment of optical trackers to femoral and tibial cutting guides prior to resection. Following resection, optical trackers were placed directly on the bone cut surface and measurements were recorded. Cutting guide and bone resection measurements of both femoral and tibial varus/valgus, femoral flexion, tibial slope angles, and both femoral and tibial medial and lateral resection depths were compared using a Student's t-test. RESULTS:Femoral cutting guide position differed from the actual cut by an average 0.6 ± 0.5° (p = 0.85) in the varus/valgus angle and 1.0 ± 1.0° (p = 0.003) in the flexion/extension angle. The difference between planned and actual cut measurements for medial and lateral femoral resection depth was 1.1 ± 1.1 mm (p = 0.32) and 1.2 ± 1.0 mm (p = 0.067), respectively. Planned cut measurements based on tibial guide position differed from the actual cut by an average of 0.9 ± 0.8° (p = 0.63) in the varus/valgus angle and 1.1 ± 1.0° (p = 0.95) in slope angle. Measurement of medial and lateral tibial resection depth differed by an average of 0.1 ± 1.8 mm (p = 0.78) and 0.2 ± 2.1 mm (p = 0.85), respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Significant discrepancies between planned and actual femoral bone resection were demonstrated for flexion/extension angle, likely the result of cutting error. Our data highlights the importance of cut verification postresection to confirm planned resections are achieved, and suggests imageless navigation may be a source of feedback that would allow surgeons to intraoperatively adjust resections to achieve optimal implant alignment.

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:Intraoperative tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common practice which may improve visualization of the surgical field and reduce blood loss. However, the safety and efficacy associated with tourniquet use continues to be a subject of debate among orthopedic surgeons. The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of tourniquet use on pain and opioid consumption after TKA. METHODS:This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial among patients undergoing TKA. Patients were preoperatively randomized to undergo TKA with or without the use of an intraoperative tourniquet. Frequency distributions, means, and standard deviations were used to describe baseline patient demographics (age, gender, race, body mass index, smoking status), length of stay, surgical factors, visual analog scale pain scores, and opioid consumption in morphine milligram equivalents. RESULTS:A total of 327 patients were included in this study, with 166 patients undergoing TKA without a tourniquet and 161 patients with a tourniquet. A statistically significant difference was found in surgical time (97.87 vs 92.98 minutes; P = .05), whereas none was found for length of stay (1.73 vs 1.70 days; P = .87), postop visual analog scale pain scores (1.73 vs 1.70; P = .87), inpatient opioid consumption (19.84 vs 19.27 morphine milligram equivalents; P = .74), or outpatient opioid consumption between the tourniquet-less and tourniquet cohorts, respectively. There were no readmissions in either cohort during the 90-day episode of care. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Utilization of a tourniquet during TKA has minimal impact on postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption when compared with patients who underwent TKA without a tourniquet.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:As our population ages, the number of octogenarians who will require a total hip arthroplasty (THA) rises. In a value-based system where operative outcomes are linked to hospital payments, it is necessary to assess the outcomes in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of elective, primary THA in patients ≥ 80 years old to those aged < 80. METHODS:A retrospective review of 10,251 consecutive THA cases from 2011 to 2019 was conducted. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores (Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)), as well as demographic, readmission, and complication data, were collected. RESULTS:= 0.57; p = 0.048). There were no observed differences in 12-week (p = 0.518) or one-year (p = 0.511) HOOS scores. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: 2021;2(7):535-539.