Revision Hip Arthroplasty Research Articles

LEUKOCYTE ESTERASE IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF PERIPROSTHETIC JOINT INFECTION: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS

No single test has demonstrated absolute accuracy in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Leukocyte esterase (LE) is a synovial marker that has proven utility in the diagnosis of PJI. The purpose of this prospective study was to (1) identify the optimal cutoff for the use of LE in the diagnosis of PJI and (2) determine whether performance of the LE strip test varied by infecting organism.This prospective study enrolled 1,015 patients undergoing hip or knee revision arthroplasty at a single institution from 2009 to September 2021. PJI was defined using a modified version of 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) criteria that excluded LE when calculating the ICM score. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the utility of the LE strip test in the diagnosis of PJI.973 patients were included in the analyses. 246 (25.4%) were classified as ICM-positive and 727 (74.6%) were classified as ICM-negative. An LE cutoff of “1+” (AUC 0.819, sensitivity 73.2%, specificity 90.6%) had superior accuracy to an LE cutoff of “2+” (AUC 0.713, sensitivity 43.9%, specificity 98.8%) in the overall diagnosis of PJI (p<0.001). When stratifying by organism type, an LE cutoff of “1+” had the best diagnostic utility for PJI caused by methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (AUC 0.888, sensitivity 87.0%, n=23) followed by Streptococcus spp. (AUC 0.882, sensitivity 85.7%, n=28), coagulase negative Staphylococci (AUC 0.836, sensitivity 76.6%, n=47), methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (AUC 0.806, sensitivity 70.6%, n=34), culture negative (AUC 0.793, sensitivity 67.9%, n=56), and gram negative rods (AUC 0.763, sensitivity 61.9%, n=21).To our knowledge, this is the largest study evaluating the utility of the LE strip test in the diagnosis of PJI. Based on our findings, it appears that a “1+” cutoff has higher diagnostic utility than a cutoff of “2+”.

Prevalence, risk factors, microbiological results and clinical outcome in unexpected positive intraoperative cultures in unclear and presumed aseptic hip and knee revision arthroplasties – A ten-year retrospective analysis with a minimum follow up of 2 years

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the prevalence, microbiological spectrum, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of unexpected-positive-intraoperative-cultures (UPIC) in presumed aseptic and unclear revision-total-hip-/knee-arthroplasties (rTHA and rTKA) compared to culture-negative (CN) revisions. MethodsThis study reviewed all International-consensus-meeting-2018 (ICM 2018) negative or inconclusive rTHA (n = 751) and rTKA (n = 679) performed at our institution from 2011 to 2020 with a minimum follow-up of two years. A Kaplan-Meier-analysis was performed to determine the septic and aseptic-free implant survival in cases with UPIC's and matched culture-negative cases. Patient demographics, risk factors, microbiological spectrum and clinical outcomes were evaluated. ResultsThere were significantly more UPIC cases in rTHA 196/751 (26.1 %) compared to rTKA 113/679 (16.6 %); (p < 0.001). UPICs in rTKA and rTHA have a lower septic and aseptic implant-free-survival compared to CN revisions. Patients with a history of nickel allergy have a higher risk of an UPIC in rTHA and rTKA (p < 0.001). Septic re-revisions after UPIC had a significantly (H: p = 0.004; K: p = 0.030) shorter time period to the primary/previous surgery (H: 84 (IQR:41–797); K: 115 (IQR:55–446)) compared to patients with aseptic re-revisions after UPIC (H:1248 (IQR:178-3534); K: 827 (IQR:361-1183)). ConclusionUPICs have a higher rate of septic and aseptic failure than CN outcomes. UPICs are twice as common in rTHA compared to rTKA. Preoperative PJI workup reduces the UPIC rate. Nickel allergy is a risk factor for UPIC. Early revisions with UPICs after primary THA or TKA have a higher risk of septic failure. The translational potential of this articleThis article provides new information on revision rates for UPIC and potential risk factors for UPIC and its treatment failure.

Salvage of failed subtrochanteric fracture fixation in the elderly: revision internal fixation or hip arthroplasty?

This study aimed to compare reoperation rate and clinical outcomes between revision open reduction and internal fixation and hip arthroplasty following failed subtrochanteric fracture fixation. A retrospective review was conducted of patients > 50years old treated for failed fixation of subtrochanteric fractures with revision ORIF or hip arthroplasty from 2003 to 2023. Primary outcomes included rate of fracture union and reoperations after initial salvage therapy. Secondary outcomes included complications (infection, dislocation, bursitis, implant prominence, implant failure, nonunion), pain, and gait-aid requirements by final follow-up. Forty-four patients were identified: 34 treated with revision ORIF and 10 with hip arthroplasty. The arthroplasty cohort was older (75.4 vs. 66.0years, p = 0.016) but did not differ from the ORIF cohort in sex, type of initial fixation, or reason for fixation failure. Patients treated with revision ORIF and patients treated with arthroplasty had similar rates of fracture union (85.3% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.772) and reoperation (35.3% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.710). There was no significant difference in rate of additional complications not requiring reoperation (0.0% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.071). The arthroplasty cohort achieved full weightbearing in significantly shorter time than the revision ORIF cohort (3.8 vs. 6.8weeks, p = 0.005). Both revision ORIF and hip arthroplasty are acceptable options for salvage of failed subtrochanteric fracture fixation in patients greater than 50years old, but patients should be counseled that although the rate of fracture union is high whether revision ORIF or hip arthroplasty is selected, the rate of reoperation can exceed 1-in-4 patients. : Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Ceramic Heads With 12/14 Titanium Sleeves Used on Manufacturer-Non-Compatible Retained Femoral Components Do Not Lead to Implant Failure in Revision Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundCeramic femoral heads with titanium sleeves are commonly used in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Companies advise against combination with a retained femoral component from another manufacturer. However, no data are available. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the implant failure and revision rates of ceramic heads with a 12/14 titanium sleeve used on manufacturer-compatible versus noncompatible retained femoral components. MethodsA retrospective single-center cohort analysis was performed using a prospectively maintained institutional arthroplasty registry. We identified 439 patients who received a titanium 12/14 ceramic head during rTHA between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2022. There were 229 manufacturer-compatible and 210 manufacturer-noncompatible retained femoral stems, according to the company's official product compatibility list. Implant failure and rerevision rates were evaluated. ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 6.6 years (IQR (interquartile range): 4.5 to 9.3), there was no significant difference (P = 0.770) in the rerevision rate between the manufacturer-compatible group (17.0%) and the noncompatible group (18.1%). Revision-free survival after rTHA was 81.2% in the manufacturer-compatible group and 78.9% in the manufacturer-noncompatible group after 15 years (P = 0.653). Most rerevisions occurred in the first year after rTHA, with 29 of 229 (12.7%) in the manufacturer-compatible group and 24 of 210 (11.4%) in the manufacturer-noncompatible group (P = 0.705). We observed only one implant failure in the manufacturer-noncompatible group, but this was not related to a mismatch problem. ConclusionsAlthough legal uncertainties remain, this study showed no increased risk of implant failure or revision rates when a ceramic femoral head, with a 12/14 titanium sleeve, was used on a noncompatible femoral stem from a manufacturer.

Comparative analysis of femoral bone loss: uncemented vs. cemented aseptic stem loosening in first-time revision surgery—a retrospective evaluation of 215 patients

IntroductionThe integrity of the femoral bone is crucial when considering reconstructive options for the first-time revision of a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Aseptic loosening of primary stems, whether cemented or uncemented, significantly affects the volume and quality of resultant femoral bone loss. This study evaluates the impact of the initial fixation method on femoral bone defect patterns by comparing the extent of bone loss.Materials and methodsA retrospective cohort of 215 patients with either cemented or uncemented stems, indicated for aseptic stem loosening, and undergoing first-time stem revision from 2010 to 2022 at our institution was analyzed. Femoral bone loss extent at first-time revision was preoperatively gauged using radiographs and categorized by the Paprosky classification. Survival probabilities pre-first-time revision for both stem types were calculated using Kaplan–Meier methods. Hazard ratios were applied to compare the risk of initial revision for uncemented versus cemented stems within the first and subsequent 2nd to 10th years post-primary implantation.ResultsCemented stems were associated with a higher occurrence of significant bone defects of type 3a (23.53% vs. 14.02%, p = .108), 3b (39.22% vs. 1.22%, p < .001), and 4 (3.92% vs. 0.00%) compared to uncemented stems. Conversely, smaller defects of type 1 and 2 were more prevalent in uncemented stem loosening (84.76% vs. 33.33%, p < .001). Notably, cemented stems exhibited a significantly prolonged revision-free period over the complete decade following primary insertion (p < .001). The unadjusted risk of first-time revision due to stem loosening showed a tendency to an increase in uncemented stems within the initial postoperative year (HR 5.55, 95% CI 0.74; 41.67, p = .096), and an adjusted risk of 2.1 (95% CI 0.26; 16.53, p = .488). However, these differences did not reach statistical significance. In the subsequent 2nd-10th years, the risk was lower compared to cemented stems (HR 2.35, 95% CI 1.39; 3.99, p = .002).ConclusionsUncemented primary stems necessitating first-time revision due to aseptic loosening demonstrated notably smaller femoral bone defects in comparison to primary cemented stems.

Successful prophylactic measures for the eradication of Staphylococcus aureus infections in elective hip primary and revision arthroplasty

IntroductionStaphylococcus aureus stands as the predominant etiological agent in postoperative acute prosthetic joint infections (PJI), contributing to 35–50% of reported cases. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dual prophylaxis incorporating cefuroxime and teicoplanin, in combination with nasal decolonization utilizing 70% alcohol, and oral and body lavage with chlorhexidine. Material and methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of electronic health records regarding primary and revision arthroplasties conducted at our institution from 2020 to 2021. Relevant variables linked to prosthetic joint infections (PJI) were documented until the latest follow-up. ResultsA total of 539 operations (447 primary arthroplasties and 92 revision arthroplasties) were performed on 519 patients. There were 11 cases of postoperative acute PJI, resulting in infection rates of 1.6% for primary arthroplasties and 4.3% for revision surgeries. Infections were more prevalent in male patients, individuals with an ASA classification>II, and those undergoing longer operations (>90min). S. aureus was not isolated in any of the cases. ConclusionThe prophylactic measures implemented in our institution have exhibited a high efficacy in preventing postoperative acute PJI caused by S. aureus.

Medicaid Reimbursement for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A State-by-State Analysis Compared With Medicare

BackgroundMedicare (MCR) reimbursement for arthroplasty procedures has been declining, but little has been reported on Medicaid (MCD) reimbursement. We sought to determine MCD reimbursement rates using state MCD data for nine arthroplasty procedure codes and compare them to MCR rates. MethodsThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services physician fee schedule was used to collect MCR reimbursement rates, and state MCD fee schedules were accessed to collect MCD rates for nine procedures encompassing primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty surgery. State MCR and MCD rates were compared to determine the mean dollar difference and dollar difference per relative value unit. A cost of living adjustment was performed using the Medicare Wage Index for each state. Coefficients of variation were calculated for each state to determine overall variability between the two systems. ResultsThe mean reimbursement rates for MCD were lower for eight of the nine codes used in the study. Medicaid reimbursed physicians an average of 11.3% less overall and 23.1% less when adjusted for cost of living. The amount of variability in the MCR rates was low with a consistent coefficient of variation of 0.06, but was higher in the MCD rates with a range of 0.26 to 0.29 in the unadjusted rates and 0.34 to 0.37 in the adjusted rates. There was a mean $6.73 decreased reimbursement per relative value unit for MCD procedures. ConclusionsFor the most common arthroplasty procedures, MCD reimbursed physicians less than MCR on average. MCD also demonstrated increased variability when compared to MCR rates between states.

Assessment Accuracy of 2D vs. 3D Imaging for Custom-Made Acetabular Implants in Revision Hip Arthroplasty.

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) presents significant challenges, particularly in patients with severe acetabular bone defects. Traditional treatment options often fall short, leading to the emergence of custom-made 3D-printed acetabular implants. Accurate assessment of implant positioning is crucial for ensuring optimal postoperative outcomes and for providing feedback to the surgical team. This single-center, retrospective cohort study evaluates the accuracy of standard 2D radiographs versus 3D CT scans in assessing the positioning of these implants, aiming to determine if 2D imaging could serve as a viable alternative for the postoperative evaluation. We analyzed the implant positions of seven rTHA patients with severe acetabular defects (Paprosky ≥ Type IIIA) using an alignment technique that integrates postoperative 2D radiographs with preoperative CT plans. Two independent investigators, one inexperienced and one experienced, measured the positioning accuracy with both imaging modalities. Measurements included translational shifts from the preoperatively templated implant position in the craniocaudal (CC), lateromedial (LM), and ventrodorsal (VD) directions, as well as rotational differences in anteversion (AV) and inclination (INCL). The study demonstrated that 2D radiographs, when aligned with preoperative CT data, could accurately assess implant positions with precision nearly comparable to that of 3D CT scans. Observed deviations were 1.4 mm and 2.7 mm in CC and LM directions, respectively, and 3.6° in AV and 0.7° in INCL using 2D imaging, all within clinically acceptable ranges. For 3D CT assessments, mean interobserver variability was up to 0.9 mm for translational shifts and 1.4° for rotation, while for 2D alignment, observer differences were 1.4 mm and 3.2° for translation and rotation, respectively. Comparative analysis of mean results from both investigators, across all dimensions (CC, LM, AV, and INCL) for 2D and 3D matching, showed no significant differences. In conclusion, conventional anteroposterior 2D radiographs of the pelvis can sufficiently determine the positioning of custom-made acetabular implants in rTHA. This suggests that 2D radiography is a viable alternative to 3D CT scans, potentially enhancing the implementation and quality control of advanced implant technologies.

Cement loaded with high-dose gentamicin and clindamycin does not reduce the risk of subsequent infection after aseptic total hip or knee revision arthroplasty: a preliminary study

PurposeThe aim of this study was to quantify the prophylactic effect of high-dose gentamicin and clindamycin antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) during revision total hip (rTHA) or knee (rTKA) arthroplasty for aseptic reasons. The hypothesis was that the raw surgical site infection (SSI) rate is lower when this particular cement is used in comparison with cement loaded with standard-dose gentamicin during rTHA or rTKA for aseptic reasons.MethodsThis retrospective study included 290 consecutive patients undergoing aseptic rTHA or rTKA. Two consecutive cohorts were defined: the first (control group) involved 145 patients where ALBC with gentamicin only was used; the second (study group) involved 145 patients where ALBC with high-dose gentamicin and clindamycin was used. The primary endpoint was the raw SSI rate after 24 months.ResultsThe raw SSI rate was 8/145 (6%) in the control group and 13/145 (9%) in the study group (odds ratio 0.62, p = 0.26). There was a significant impact of the presence of any risk factor on the SSI rate (15/100 versus 6/169, odds ratio = 4.25, p = 0.002), but no significant impact of any individual risk factor. No complication or side effect related to ALBC was observed in either group.ConclusionThese results do not support the routine use of gentamicin and clindamycin ALBC for fixation of revision implants after rTHA and rTKA for aseptic reasons.

A comparison of dislocation risk between dual mobility and traditional constructs used in proximal femoral replacement

BackgroundProximal femoral replacement (PFR) is a reconstruction technique after tumor resection or for revision of failed total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, despite acceptable long-term oncologic and functional outcomes, extensive soft tissue or bone loss increases the risk for prosthetic instability. Instability may depend on the construct chosen for reconstruction, with current options including bipolar, constrained, or dual mobility implants. Clinical studies comparing patient outcomes after PFR with these three different constructs are limited. MethodsThis study retrospectively examined a single tertiary academic institution's experience with PFR over a fifteen-year period. The medical records of patients who underwent PFR for indications such as tumor and failed THA with bone loss were reviewed. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on use of bipolar, constrained, or dual mobility implants. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, perioperative data, and data on prosthetic dislocations were recorded. ANOVA and chi-square testing was performed for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. The threshold for statistical significance was set to p < 0.05. Results106 patients were identified who underwent PFR. 46 underwent PFR with bipolar prosthesis (follow-up: 20 ± 24.57 months), 42 with constrained liner (follow-up: 30.45 ± 35.32 months), and 18 with dual mobility (follow-up: 15.38 ± 15.67 months). Only BMI (p = 0.036) and smoking history (P = 0.002) differed between groups. Dislocations occurred in 4 (8.7 %) patients who underwent reconstruction with bipolar prosthesis, compared to 8 (19.0 %) with constrained liner, and 3 (16.7 %) patients with dual mobility. Mean time to dislocation was significantly longer in dual mobility patients (P = 0.009). There were no differences in instances of early dislocation between groups (P = 00.238). ConclusionWhile study numbers are low, mean time to dislocation was significantly longer with dual mobility. Additional large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to fully elucidate the differences in outcomes amongst these three treatments.

The role of BioFire Joint Infection Panel in diagnosing periprosthetic hip and knee joint infections in patients with unclear conventional microbiological results.

This study aimed to evaluate the BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel in cases of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) where conventional microbiology is unclear, and to assess its role as a complementary intraoperative diagnostic tool. Five groups representing common microbiological scenarios in hip and knee revision arthroplasty were selected from our arthroplasty registry, prospectively maintained PJI databases, and biobank: 1) unexpected-negative cultures (UNCs), 2) unexpected-positive cultures (UPCs), 3) single-positive intraoperative cultures (SPCs), and 4) clearly septic and 5) aseptic cases. In total, 268 archived synovial fluid samples from 195 patients who underwent acute/chronic revision total hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Cases were classified according to the International Consensus Meeting 2018 criteria. JI panel evaluation of synovial fluid was performed, and the results were compared with cultures. The JI panel detected microorganisms in 7/48 (14.5%) and 15/67 (22.4%) cases related to UNCs and SPCs, respectively, but not in cases of UPCs. The correlation between JI panel detection and infection classification criteria for early/late acute and chronic PJI was 46.6%, 73%, and 40%, respectively. Overall, the JI panel identified 12.6% additional microorganisms and three new species. The JI panel pathogen identification showed a sensitivity and specificity of 41.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 33.7 to 49.5) and 91.1% (95% CI 84.7 to 94.9), respectively. In total, 19/195 (9.7%) could have been managed differently and more accurately upon JI panel evaluation. Despite its microbial limitation, JI panel demonstrated clinical usefulness by complementing the traditional methods based on multiple cultures, particularly in PJI with unclear microbiological results.

Aspirin is an Effective Prophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolism After Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) following revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) poses significant risks despite prophylactic measures. The optimal VTE prophylaxis agent for revision TJA remains unclear. This study aimed to compare aspirin against various anticoagulant agents regarding efficacy and safety in preventing symptomatic VTE events after revision TJA. MethodsA retrospective analysis included 4,575 patients undergoing revision TJA between 2008 and 2020. Of these, 2,091 received aspirin, while 2,484 received other anticoagulants. Demographic, procedural, and outcome data were collected. Logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of symptomatic VTE. ResultsThe aspirin group showed a significantly lower incidence of symptomatic VTE compared to the other anticoagulant group (0.53 versus 2.54%, P < .001). Logistic regression confirmed a higher risk of VTE with other anticoagulants (odds ratio: 0.2 to 0.26, P < .001), while blood transfusion (odds ratio: 2.72, P = .001) were identified as risk factors. ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that aspirin is a viable and potentially safer option than other anticoagulants, exhibiting comparable efficacy in preventing VTE events in revision TJA. Balancing effectiveness and safety is crucial, considering patient-specific risk factors and bleeding tendencies. This large cohort study demonstrated that aspirin was associated with a more effective and safer VTE prophylaxis agent, compared to other anticoagulants, in patients undergoing revision TJA.

The impact of extended preoperative examination on the treatment tactics choice before the second stage of revision hip arthroplasty

Background. Reinfection and recurrence of periprosthetic infection rates during the second stage of revision hip arthroplasty (RHA) remain quite high. Performing preoperative diagnostic aspiration in patients with the installed hip spacer is a controversial issue. Aims of the study: 1) to compare the diagnostic accuracy, specificity and sensitivity of the used infection markers as a part of preoperative diagnostic protocols in order to exclude reinfection in patients with installed hip spacer before the second stage of RHA; 2) to analyze and compare the microbiological spectrum obtained at the stages of RHA. Methods. Diagnostic accuracy parameters of the used infection markers were assessed in order to exclude reinfection/recurrence in 107 patients with installed hip spacer. All patients were divided into two groups. In Group 1 (prospective), blood tests as well as diagnostic aspiration of synovial fluid were performed within the extended diagnostic protocol. In Group 2 (retrospective), the examination was performed according to the screening preoperative diagnostic protocol including blood tests. The used reference range of inflammatory biomarkers was based on the “small criteria” of ICM 2018. According to the results of the intraoperative microbiological examination of peri-implant tissue samples at the first and second stages of RHA, the analysis of detected microflora was conducted in order to assess probable reinfection/recurrence. Results. According to the results of the intraoperative microbiologic examination during the second stage of RHA, reinfection was detected in 40% of cases: in Group 1 — 9 cases, in Group 2 — 31 case. Synovial fluid was obtained from 85% of cases when preoperative diagnostic aspiration was performed. Synovial fluid could not be obtained in 15% cases (dry joint). Conclusion. Performing preoperative diagnostic aspiration before the second stage of RHA in patients with the installed spacer allowed choosing correct treatment tactics in 9% of cases. The parameters of diagnostic accuracy accounted for 82,6%. In the structure of detected pathogens in case of recurrence and reinfection, the representatives of Gram-positive coagulase-negative flora were the most frequent.

Dual Mobility Cup in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract Background Proximal femoral fractures are considered a common problem in the elderly. Osteoporosis and the risk of fall especially in old age add to the complexity of management of these types of fractures. These fractures can be managed with different types of implants e.g. Dynamic hip screw, proximal femoral nail, proximal femoral plate, etc.. Aim of the Work Prospective clinical trial study to assess the role of dual mobility unconstrained acetabular components in preventing and treating instability. Patients and Methods In the period between December 2014 to April 2017 a prospective study was conducted involving 25 patients with high risk of dislocation underwent total hip replacement using dual mobility cup either as primary hip arthroplasty or revision hip arthroplasty. All cases were operated upon in Ain Shams University Hospitals and the follow up of the cases was 1 year. Results There were no cases of prosthesis dislocation or loosening. There were only two cases of superficial wound infections who improved with wound debridement. Studies showed that the dual mobility cup did a great success in reduction in the risk of dislocation in specific conditions as patients with polio and other neuromuscular disorders and other risk factors for head dislocation. Conclusion Conversion of a failed implant to a total hip implant is a good and safe option in treatment of such cases. Dual mobility cups decreased the risk of dislocation in such cases with increased longevity of the prosthesis and a considerably accepted range of motion of the hip joint.

Are social determinants of health associated with an increased length of hospitalization after revision total hip and knee arthroplasty? A comparison study of social deprivation indices.

Length of stay (LOS) has been extensively assessed as a marker for healthcare utilization, functional outcomes, and cost of care for patients undergoing arthroplasty. The notable patient-to-patient variation in LOS following revision hip and knee total joint arthroplasty (TJA) suggests a potential opportunity to reduce preventable discharge delays. Previous studies investigated the impact of social determinants of health (SDoH) on orthopaedic conditions and outcomes using deprivation indices with inconsistent findings. The aim of the study is to compare the association of three publicly available national indices of social deprivation with prolonged LOS in revision TJA patients. 1,047 consecutive patients who underwent a revision TJA were included in this retrospective study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and behavioral characteristics were extracted. Area deprivation index (ADI), social deprivation index (SDI), and social vulnerability index (SVI) were recorded for each patient, following which univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the relationship between deprivation measures and prolonged LOS (greater than five days postoperatively). 193 patients had a prolonged LOS following surgery. Categorical ADI was significantly associated with prolonged LOS following surgery (OR = 2.14; 95% CI = 1.30-3.54; p = 0.003). No association with LOS was found using SDI and SVI. When accounting for other covariates, only ASA scores (ORrange=3.43-3.45; p < 0.001) and age (ORrange=1.00-1.03; prange=0.025-0.049) were independently associated with prolonged LOS. The varying relationship observed between the length of stay and socioeconomic markers in this study indicates that the selection of a deprivation index could significantly impact the outcomes when investigating the association between socioeconomic deprivation and clinical outcomes. These results suggest that ADI is a potential metric of social determinants of health that is applicable both clinically and in future policies related to hospital stays including bundled payment plan following revision TJA.

16S rRNA sequencing reveals microbiota differences in orthopedic implants between aseptic loosening and prosthetic joint infection cases.

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and aseptic loosening (AL) are common complications of total joint arthroplasty. An accumulation of evidence indicates the presence of microbial communities on prosthetic implants, but the overall microbial profile is unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the differences in the microbial composition of prosthetic implants obtained from PJI and AL patients using the 16S rRNA sequencing method. Patients who underwent revision hip, knee, or shoulder arthroplasty caused by PJI (n = 20) or AL (n = 10) were enrolled in the study. 16S rRNA sequencing targeting the V3-V4 region was performed on the microbial specimens collected from synovial fluid, periprosthetic deep-tissue, and biofilm during the revision surgery. The sequenced raw data were analysed for microbial composition and ecological and differential abundance analyses using bioinformatics tools. The AL group had relatively balanced and higher diversity, with Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, and Veillonella being prominent. In the PJI group, Staphylococcus and Pseudomonas were predominant, especially in deep-tissue samples and biofilm samples, respectively. The differential abundance analysis identified 15 and 2 distinctive taxa in the AL and PJI groups, respectively. Our findings provided preliminary insights supporting the existence of periprosthetic microbiota in orthopedic implants and explaining the differences in microbial composition between the AL and PJI groups.

The Use of Dual-Mobility Implants Through a Direct Anterior Approach as a Safe and Effective Technique for Revision Hip Arthroplasty: The Two-Year Follow-Up of a Case Series.

Background Dislocation is one of the most prominent and challenging complications following the revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual-mobility cups are an option to address this problem. There is, however, little data on the outcomes of modern modular dual-mobility (MDM) cups in the revision of THA. In this study, the clinical and radiological outcomes following the revision of THA with an MDM cup using the direct anterior approach (DAA) were evaluated. Methodology We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent a revision of THA between March 2017 and July 2019. The inclusion criteria were a revision of THA using an MDM cup through the DAA. A uniform acetabular implant was used in each revision. Outcome measures were assessed radiographically and clinically. The clinical outcome measures consisted of dislocation, infection, and re-revision. Functional assessment was performed using the Harris Hip Score preoperatively and at the last clinical examination in our department. Results This study retrospectively identified a cohort of 26 patients who underwent a revision of THA. Two patients were excluded due to incomplete follow-up because they died. Finally, 24 patients were included. A total of 17 isolated acetabular revisions and seven complete revisions were performed with a mean follow-up of 39 months (range = 29-59). No dislocations or deep infections were observed in our population to date. Except for one case of early aseptic loosening of the acetabular component, we observed no other signs of loosening, osteolysis, migration, or intraprosthetic dislocation. Conclusions THA revision through the DAA using an MDM cup is a safe and effective procedure. We observed no dislocation in a high-risk population undergoing THA revision surgery during a minimal follow-up of two years.

Paper 16: Long-term Outcomes of Primary Hip Arthroscopy: Multicenter Analysis at Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up with Attention to Labral and Capsular Management

Objectives: Hip arthroscopy is rapidly advancing, with literature increasingly reporting positive outcomes at short- and mid-term follow-up; however, available long-term data remains limited. The purpose of this study is to evaluate long-term outcomes of primary hip arthroscopy at minimum 10-year follow-up at two academic centers by describing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and determining reoperation, revision, and total hip arthroplasty (THA) rates. Methods: Primary hip arthroscopies performed between January 1988 and April 2013 at 2 academic centers were evaluated for postoperative PROs including Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Tegner Activity Scale score, Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living and Sport Scale (HOS-ADL/HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), surgery satisfaction, function, and reoperations. Results: Two-hundred ninety-four primary hip arthroscopies with a mean age of 40±14 years; 66% female; and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 27±6 kg/m2 were followed for mean 12±3 years (range: 10-24). Labral debridement and repair were performed in 41% and 59% of patients, respectively. All patients underwent interportal capsulotomy and 2% underwent T-capsulotomy. Eleven percent of patients underwent capsular repair. At final follow-up, patients reported mean VAS at rest of 2±2, with use of 3±3, iHOT-12 of 68±27, NAHS of 81±18, mHHS of 79±17, HOS-ADL of 82±19, and HOS-SS of 74±25. Mean surgical satisfaction was 8.4±2.4 (Table 1). Sixty-five hips (23%) underwent THA and 33 (11%) underwent revision arthroscopy (Table 2). Risk factors for THA included older age (p&lt;0.001), higher BMI (p&lt;0.001), lower lateral center-edge angle (p=0.039), larger alpha angle (p=0.001), higher Tönnis grade (p=0.011), labral debridement (p=0.004), and capsular nonrepair (p=0.030). Patients undergoing combined labral and capsular repair demonstrated a THA conversion rate of 3% compared to 31% for patients undergoing combined labral debridement and capsular nonrepair (p=0.006) (Table 3). Labral repair trended towards increased 10-year THA-free survival (84% vs. 77%, p=0.085) while capsular repair demonstrated significantly increased 10-year THA-free survival (97% vs 79%, p=0.032) (Figure 1). Conclusions: At minimum 10-year follow-up, patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy demonstrated high rates of satisfaction and acceptable outcome scores. In total, 11% of patients underwent revision hip arthroscopic surgery with a THA conversion rate of 23%. Conversion to THA was associated with patient factors including older age and higher Tönnis grade as well as potentially modifiable surgical factors including labral debridement and capsular nonrepair.

Клинико-экономический анализ эффективности использования индивидуальных и серийных имплантатов при эндопротезировании тазобедренного и коленного суставов.

One of the pressing issues of modern medicine is the need to improve the results of surgical treatment of patients with stage III osteoarthritis of large joints (according to the classification of N. S. Kosinskaya), as well as with loosening of the components of hip and knee joints through the use of techniques that have high clinical and economic efficiency and including the use of computer modeling and additive 3D printing technologies. Purpose of the study: to conduct a clinical and economic analysis of the effectiveness of using individual and serial components of endoprostheses in the surgical treatment of patients with stage III hip osteoarthritis (according to N. S. Kosinskaya’s classification), as well as with loosening of hip and knee joint implants. Methods: clinical-radiological, computed tomographic, biomechanical, statistical, analytical, sociological. The study included 348 patients who were divided into 10 groups depending on the individual and serial components of implants used in their treatment. Results. The effectiveness of surgical treatment of stage III hip osteoarthritis using individual acetabular implants in primary hip replacement, assessed using QALYs, was 0.79, and the CER (“cost-effectiveness”) indicator was 350,424.7. Moreover, the use of only serial imlants in a similar operation led to a decrease in CER to 262,977.2 and QALY to 0.63. Higher QALYs have also been observed with the use of additive technologies in revision hip arthroplasty. The effectiveness of surgical treatment using individual implants for type IIIa acetabular defect was 0.77 (CER – 341,110), for type IIIb – 0.6 (CER – 496,754.3). When using serial components of a revision hip joint implants for type IIIa acetabular defect, the QALY was 0.4 (CER – 540,462.5), for type IIIb – 0.4 (CER – 653,500.5). The best QALYs (0.15) and CER (1,348,892) were also obtained with the use of individual acetabular implants made of bone cement in hip replacement for periprosthetic infection in comparison with standard spacers (QALY – 0.07; CER – 2,845 801). The effectiveness of surgical treatment of patients with bone defects of type 2B and 3 according to AORI using individual implants during revision knee arthroplasty was 0.83 (CER – 494,236.8), using serial designs – 0.44 (CER – 939,489, 4). Conclusions. The use of individual implants in total replacement in patients with stage III hip osteoarthritis (according to N. S. Kosinskaya’s classification), as well as loosening of hip and knee implants, made it possible to achieve higher rates of effectiveness of surgical treatment in comparison with implantation of only serial structures. The use of additive 3D printing technologies in all cases, except knee joint replacement for bone defects of types 2B and 3 according to AORI, led to increased costs for treating patients. As a result of the clinical and economic analysis, it was revealed that the use of individual implants made using 3D printing in revision hip arthroplasty for IIIa and IIIb defects of the acetabulum, septic loosening of the components of a previously installed implants, as well as in re-replacement of the knee joint in the presence of AORI type 2B and 3 bone defects achieves the best cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) and is “strongly preferable” to implantation of serial constructs only.

Revision Hip Arthroplasty Performed by Fellowship-Trained Versus Non–Fellowship-Trained Surgeons: A Comparison of Perioperative Management and Complications

BackgroundSuccessful revision hip arthroplasty (rTHA) requires major resource allocation and a surgical team adept at managing these complex cases. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of rTHA performed by fellowship-trained and non–fellowship-trained surgeons. MethodsA national administrative database was utilized to identify 5,880 patients who underwent aseptic rTHA and 1,622 patients who underwent head-liner exchange for infection by fellowship-trained and non–fellowship-trained surgeons from 2010 to 2020 with a 5-year follow-up. Postoperative opioid and anticoagulant prescriptions were compared among surgeons. Patients treated by fellowship-trained and non–fellowship-trained surgeons had propensity scores matched based on age, sex, comorbidity index, and diagnosis. The 5-year surgical complications were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine the odds of failure following head-liner exchange when performed by a fellowship-trained versus non–fellowship-trained surgeon. ResultsAseptic rTHA patients treated by fellowship-trained surgeons received fewer opioids (132 versus 165 milligram morphine equivalents per patient) and nonaspirin anticoagulants (21.4 versus 32.0%, P < .001). Fellowship-training was associated with lower dislocation rates (9.9 versus 14.2%, P = .011), fewer postoperative infections, and fewer periprosthetic fractures and re-revisions (15.2 versus 21.3%, P < .001). Head-liner exchange for infection performed by fellowship-trained surgeons was associated with lower odds of failure (31.2 versus 45.7%, odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.91, P < .001). ConclusionsrTHA performed by adult reconstruction fellowship-trained surgeons results in fewer re-revisions in aseptic cases and head-liner exchanges. Variations in resources, volumes, and perioperative protocols may account for some of the differences.