Search

Introduction: Revision shoulder arthroplasty can be challenging. One of the main considerations for surgeons is the type of implant that was placed in the initial surgery. Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty (ASA) is used for cases of osteoarthritis as well as for fractures of the humeral head. Hemiarthroplasty can be used for complex proximal humerus fractures. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is a difference in clinical and radiographic outcomes between patients that failed primary fracture hemiarthroplasty (FHA), or ASA for osteoarthritis and then required reoperation with a conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Methods: Patients with failed anatomic shoulder replacement, who had undergone conversion to RSA, were enrolled after a mean follow-up of 107 (85–157) months. Two different groups, one with failed ASA implanted for osteoarthritis and one with failed FHA, were created. At follow-up patients were assessed with standard radiographs and clinical outcome scores. Results: Twenty-nine patients (f = 17, m = 12; 51%) suffered from a failed ASA (Group A), while the remaining 28 patients (f = 21, m = 74; 49%) had been revised due to a failed FHA (Group B). Patients of Group B had a poorer Constant score (Group A: 60 vs. Group B: 46; p = 0.02). Abduction (Group A: 115° vs. Group B: 89°; p = 0.02) was worse after conversion of a failed FHA to RSA in comparison to conversions of failed ASA. The mean bone loss of the lateral metaphysis was higher in patients with failed FHA (Group A: 5 mm vs. Group B: 20 mm; p = 0.0). Conclusion: The initial indication for anatomic shoulder arthroplasty influences the clinical and radiological outcome after conversion to RSA. Conversion of failed FHA to RSA is related to an increased metaphyseal bone loss, decreased range of motion and poorer clinical outcomes when compared to conversions of failed ASA implanted for osteoarthritis. Level of Evidence: III Retrospective Cohort Comparison Study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a known complication of hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures (FNF) with various prophylactic anticoagulants utilized to decrease risk. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and perioperative outcomes associated with aspirin for VTE prophylaxis following arthroplasty for FNF. Methods: Medical records of 1,220 patients who underwent hip hemiarthroplasty (HHA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) at an urban academic center from 2011 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes, including length of stay (LOS), VTE, 90-day hospital encounters, and discharge disposition, were collected. Outcomes for patients prescribed aspirin (n = 214) were compared to those prescribed non-aspirin VTE prophylaxis (n = 1006) using propensity score matching. Results: Patients who received aspirin had higher rates of THA (36.0 vs 26.7%; p = 0.008). There were no significant risk-adjusted differences in the incidence of VTE (0.5 vs 0.5%, p = 1.000) and 90-day readmissions (10.4 vs 12.3%, p = 0.646) between patients prescribed aspirin and non-aspirin VTE prophylaxis, respectively. Patients prescribed non-aspirin agents had higher rates of non-home discharge (73.9 vs 58.5%; p < 0.001) and longer LOS (143.5 vs 124.9 h; p = 0.005). Sub-analysis of patients prescribed aspirin and non-aspirin prophylaxis based on comorbidity scores demonstrated no difference in VTE incidence for low (0.0 vs 1.6%, p = 1.000) and high scores (0.0 vs 0.0%, p = 1.000), respectively. Conclusion: Aspirin is not associated with increased incidence of VTE after HHA or THA for FNF. Aspirin prophylaxis should be considered in hip fracture patients to mitigate bleeding risk, particularly those with low to intermediate VTE risk. Level of evidence: Level III, Retrospective study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The surgical management of intertrochanter femur fracture in elderly patient is still under debate. Various implants can be utilised but prosthetic replacement is gaining popularity. This study was performed to evaluate the functional and clinical outcomes of cemented bipolar arthroplasty as a primary treatment for unstable intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients (> 70 years). Materials and methods: Thirty-seven patients with unstable intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patient (> 70 years) who underwent cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Intra-operative and post-operative complications were noted; functional outcomes were assessed using Harris hip score (HHS). All patients were followed up for a minimum of 12 months. Results: Overall 90% of patients has some minor or major intra or post-operative complication. One year mortality rate was 16% (6/37). Cardiopulmonary events were the most common life threatening incident. Mean fall in Haemoglobin was 1.6 gm/dL. The average time for full weight bearing mobilisation with the help of walker was 2.8 ± 1.2 days (1–8 days). The average duration of surgery was 58 ± 6 min (44–96 min) with an average blood loss of 126 ± 24 mL (90–380 mL). HHS at the end of 12 months was 77. Conclusions: The use of bipolar hemiarthroplasty in senile patient with unstable hemiarthroplasty gives an advantage of early weight bearing. However, it is associated with risk of significant intra or post-operative morbidity due to intra-operative trauma, surgical time and blood loss during the surgery. Although hemiarthroplasty can be a single-time solution to the complexities of intertrochanter fracture in elderly patients but should be performed in selected patients only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study was initiated to analyze the outcome after distal femoral replacement (DFR) for periprosthetic distal femoral fractures (PDFF). Methods: Data from the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) were analyzed. A total of 626 patients could be identified with a DFR for PDFF. Mean age was 78.8 years, and 84.2% were female. Revisions and mortality were analyzed and compared with patient groups with a similar procedure (revision total knee arthroplasty) or similar general condition (fracture total hip arthroplasty, hip hemiarthroplasty). Matched-pair-analyses were performed. Results: Within one year after surgery, 13.2% of the patients had died and further 9.4% were revised. Within four years, 32.7% had died and 19.7% were revised. Revisions were nearly twice as high as in the comparison groups. Periprosthetic infection (PJI) was the most frequent cause for revision, resulting in a PJI rate of 12.8%, which was lower in the comparison groups. Mortality after DFR was as similar high as after fracture hip arthroplasty. Conclusion: PDFF are a serious injury, and the necessary surgical treatment has a high risk of complications. Every third patient after DFR for PDFF had died and every fifth patient needed revision within 4 years after surgery. Efforts should be undertaken to provide optimal treatment to these high-risk patients to reduce unfavorable outcomes. Level of evidence: III. Registration of clinical trials: As this is a registry-derived study of data of the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD), no registration was performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]