Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Few studies have assessed how socioeconomic status (SES) influences patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study evaluated the impact of patient median ZIP code income levels on PROMs after TKA. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed patients at our institution undergoing primary, unilateral TKA from 2017 to 2020. Patients who did not have one-year postoperative PROMs were excluded. Patients were stratified based on the quartile of their home ZIP code median income from United States Census Bureau data. There were 1,267 patients included: 98 in quartile 1 (median income ≤ $46,308) (7.7%); 126 in quartile 2 (median income $46,309-$57,848) (10.0%); 194 in quartile 3 (median income $57,849-$74,011) (15.7%); and 849 in quartile 4 (median income ≥ $74,012) (66.4%). We collected baseline demographic data, 2-year outcomes, and PROMs preoperatively, as well as at 12 weeks and one year, postoperatively. RESULTS:The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement was significantly higher in quartile 4 preoperatively (P < .001), 12 weeks postoperatively (P < .001), and one year postoperatively (P < .001). There were no significant differences in delta improvements of Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement from preoperative to 12 weeks or one year postoperatively. There were no significant differences in lengths of stay, discharge dispositions, readmissions, or revisions. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients from lower income areas have slightly worse knee function preoperatively and worse outcomes following TKA. However, improvements in PROMs throughout the first year postoperatively are similar across income quartiles, suggesting that patients from lower income quartiles achieve comparable therapeutic benefits from TKA. LEVEL III EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND:Removal of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the inpatient only list has led to a greater focus on outpatient (OP) procedures. However, the impact of OP-centered models in at-risk patients is unclear. Therefore, the current analysis investigated the effect of conversion from OP to inpatient (IP) status on postoperative outcomes and determined which factors put patients at risk for status change postoperatively. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent a primary TKA at our institution between January 2, 2018, and April 26, 2022. All patients included were originally scheduled for OP surgery and were separated based on conversion to IP status postoperatively. Multiple regression analyses were used to determine the significance of all perioperative variables. Modeling via binary logistic regressions was used to determine factors predictive of status conversion. RESULTS:Of the 2,313 patients originally designated for OP TKA, 627 (27.1%) required a stay of 2 midnights or longer. Patients in the IP group had significantly higher facility discharge rates (P < .001) compared to the OP group. Factors predictive of conversion included age of 65 years and older (P < .001), women (P < .001), arriving at the postanesthesia care unit after 12 pm (P < .001), body mass index greater than 30 (P = .004), and Charlson Comorbidity Index of 4 and higher (P = .004). Being the first case of the day (P < .001) and being married (P < .001) were both protective against conversion. CONCLUSION:Certain intrinsic patient factors may predispose a patient to an IP stay, and an understanding of predisposing factors which could lead to IP conversion may improve perioperative planning moving forward.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Femoral stem cementation provides excellent implant longevity with a low periprosthetic fracture rate among patients with compromised bone quality or abnormal anatomy. We radiologically evaluated the quality of the femoral cement mantle in patients undergoing THA to examine whether cementation quality improved with increased institutional experience. METHODS:A retrospective study of 542 primary elective THAs performed using cemented stems from 2016 to 2021 at a high-volume orthopedic specialty center was conducted. Immediate post-operative anterior-posterior (AP) and lateral radiographs were evaluated to assess cement mantle quality based on the Barrack classification. Cement mantles were deemed satisfactory (Barrack A and B) or unsatisfactory (Barrack C and D). Regression was performed to identify predictors of unsatisfactory cementation quality. RESULTS:The annual cemented primary THA volume increased throughout the study period from 14 cases in 2016 to 201 cases in 2021. Overall, the majority of cement mantles were deemed satisfactory; 91.7% on AP radiographs and 91.0% on lateral radiographs. Satisfactory cementation on AP radiograph achievement rates improved during the study period, which coincided with greater annual volume (p < 0.001). No association was found between posterior and direct anterior surgical approaches and satisfactory cementation quality on both AP and lateral radiographs. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Majority of femoral stems had satisfactory cementation quality. Higher institutional annual cemented THA volume was associated with improved cementation quality. Residency and fellowship training programs should place greater emphasis on the importance of femoral stem cementation for appropriately indicated patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND:Prior literature has demonstrated that diabetic (DM) patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) with elevated preoperative HbA1c scores have poorer clinical outcomes. However, no literature has reported the effect of undergoing TJA on laboratory markers of glycemic control. This study sought to evaluate effect of undergoing TJA on postoperative glycemic control and outcomes. METHODS:This retrospective study reviewed all patients with DM who underwent primary, elective TJA at our high volume orthopedic institution. Included patients had at least one HbA1c value 3 months to 2 weeks pre-surgery and 3-6 months after surgery. Changes in HbA1c from before to after surgery were calculated. Change in HbA1c greater than 1.0% was considered clinically meaningful. Change in HbA1c was analyzed and stratified into subgroups. RESULTS:In total, 770 primary TJA patients were included. Patients with preoperative HbA1c > 7% vs. ≤ 7% were significantly more likely to have clinically meaningful post-TJA decrease in HbA1c (24.5 vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001). Patients with preoperative HbA1c > 8 were significantly more likely to have decrease of > 2.0 compared to those with HbA1c < 8 (p < 0.001). Multivariate regression revealed that preop HbA1c > 7.0, former and current smokers, males, and African-Americans were significantly more likely to achieve clinically meaningful decrease in HbA1c. Additionally, postoperative increase in HbA1c > 1% was associated with significantly higher 90-day ED visits. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients with higher preoperative HbA1c were more likely to have clinically meaningful decreases in HbA1c postoperatively. A combination of preoperative medical optimization and improvements in mobility after TJA may play a role in these changes. Those with elevated HbA1c can have meaningful improvement in HbA1c after TJA.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Round or oval implants are used in patellar resurfacing during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, whether component geometry affects clinical outcomes is unclear. This study aimed to determine if one implant shape conferred superior outcomes to the other. METHODS:A retrospective review of primary TKA cases performed from 2016 to 2020 was conducted at an urban, tertiary academic center. 400 consecutive, primary TKAs were included in these analyses. Cases were included if a surgeon used the round design then oval design for fifty consecutive cases. Baseline demographic data and radiographic measurements were assessed. Surgical data, reasons for revision, and patient reported outcome measures were analyzed. Independent samples t- and chi-squared tests were used to compare means and proportions. There were no demographic differences between the cohorts. RESULTS:Post-operative patellar tilt was statistically different between the cohorts. Sixteen patients required revision surgery; however, revision rates did not differ between cohorts. Of the nine round, one button was revised for infection. Of the seven oval, one button was revised for infection and one for loosening. Veterans RAND 12 Physical Component Score at three-months postoperatively was higher for the round cohort, but no differences were observed at one-year. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:While radiographic patellar tilt was significantly different between the cohorts, there was no clinical correlation in outcomes at three-months or one-year postoperatively. Longer-term follow-up studies are needed to evaluate the implications of patellar component design on outcomes and function. Nevertheless, the current study affirms that both designs are clinically equivalent which should be used to guide clinical decision-making.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Kinematically designed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to restore normal kinematics by replicating the function of both cruciate ligaments. Traditional posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA designs, on the other hand, simplify knee kinematics and may improve TKA cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients who underwent primary TKA using either a traditional PS or kinematically designed TKA. METHODS:This retrospective study examined all patients who underwent primary TKA using either a kinematically or a traditional PS designed TKA implant, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patient demographics, complications, readmissions, revision rates and causes, range of motion (ROM) and patient reported outcomes (KOOS, JR) were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed to estimate freedom from revision, and multivariate regression was performed to control for confounding variables. RESULTS:A total of 396 TKAs [173 (43.7%) with a kinematic design, 223 (56.3%) with a traditional design] with a mean follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.51 years underwent analysis. Revision rates did not differ between groups (9.8% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.418). In Kaplan-Meier analysis at 2-year follow-up, freedom from all-cause revision (96.4% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.139) were similar between groups. The two cohorts had no significant difference in aseptic loosening at 2 years (99.6% vs. 97.1, p = 0.050) and at latest follow up (92.7% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.279). KOOS, JR scores and post-operative ROM were similar between groups. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrated similar mid-term outcomes following the use of both a kinematically designed and a traditionally designed implant in primary TKA patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective study-III.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Despite the excellent outcomes associated with primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), implant failure and revision continue to burden the healthcare system. The use of computer-assisted navigation (CAN) offers the potential for more accurate placement of hip components during surgery. While intraoperative CAN systems have been shown to improve outcomes in primary THA, their use in the context of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) has not been elucidated. We sought to investigate the validity of using CAN during rTHA. METHODS:A retrospective analysis was performed at an academic medical institution identifying all patients who underwent rTHA using CAN from 2016-2019. Patients were 1:1 matched with patients undergoing rTHA without CAN (control) based on demographic data. Cup anteversion, inclination, change in leg length discrepancy (ΔLLD) and change in femoral offset between pre- and post-operative plain weight-bearing radiographic images were measured and compared between both groups. A safety target zone of 15-25° for anteversion and 30-50° for inclination was used as a reference for precision analysis of cup position. RESULTS:Eighty-four patients were included: 42 CAN cases and 42 control cases. CAN cases displayed a lower ΔLLD (5.74 ± 7.0 mm vs 9.13 ± 7.9 mm, p = 0.04) and greater anteversion (23.4 ± 8.53° vs 19.76 ± 8.36°, p = 0.0468). There was no statistical difference between the proportion of CAN or control cases that fell within the target safe zone (40% vs 20.9%, p =  0.06). Femoral offset was similar in CAN and control cases (7.63 ± 5.84 mm vs 7.14 ± 4.8 mm, p = 0.68). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our findings suggest that the use of CAN may improve accuracy in cup placement compared to conventional methodology, but our numbers are underpowered to show a statistical difference. However, with a ΔLLD of ~ 3.4 mm, CAN may be useful in facilitating the successful restoration of pre-operative leg length following rTHA. Therefore, CAN may be a helpful tool for orthopedic surgeons to assist in cup placement and LLD during complex revision cases.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Arthrofibrosis remains a common cause of patient dissatisfaction and reoperation after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Losartan is an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) with inhibitory effects on transforming growth factor beta, previously implicated in tissue repair induced fibrosis, and has been studied to prevent stiffness following hip arthroscopy. This study aimed to evaluate pre- and postoperative range of motion (ROM) and the incidence of manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) following primary TKA in patients taking Losartan preoperatively for hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:A retrospective review of 170 patients from 2012 to 2020 who underwent a primary, elective TKA and were prescribed Losartan at least three months prior to surgery. All patients who were prescribed Losartan and had a preoperative and postoperative ROM in their chart were included and were matched to a control group of patients who underwent TKA and had no Losartan prescription. ROM, MUA, readmissions, reoperations, and revisions were assessed using chi-square and independent sample t tests. RESULTS:Seventy-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. Preoperative ROM was similar between patients on Losartan and the control group (103.59° ± 16.14° vs. 104.59° ± 21.59°, respectively; p = 0.745). Postoperative ROM and ΔROM were greater for patients prescribed Losartan (114.29° ± 12.32° vs. 112.76° ± 11.65°; p = 0.429 and 10.57° ± 14.95° vs. 8.17° ± 21.68°; p = 0.422), though this difference did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference in readmission, rate of manipulation for stiffness, or all-cause revision rates. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In this study, we found that the use of Losartan did not significantly improve postoperative ROM, reduce MUA or decrease revision rates. Further prospective studies using Losartan are required to elucidate the potential effects on ROM and incidence of arthrofibrosis requiring MUA. LEVEL III EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective cohort study.