Search

Monoblock ceramic cups are designed to accommodate large-diameter femoral heads. This has the potential to offer the advantages of an increased range of motion and enhanced joint stability. These features could benefit younger and high-demand patients in need of total hip arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the survival rate and the reasons for revision of the DeltaMotion cup. Data from the AOANJRR were analyzed for all patients who had undergone a primary conventional THA performed between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2021. Only prostheses with ceramic/ceramic, ceramic/XLPE, metal/XLPE, or CM/XLPE bearing surfaces were included. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative percent revision for all causes. Secondary outcome measures were revision for dislocation/instability, ceramic breakage, or noise. A subanalysis for cup size was also performed. There were 486,946 primary conventional THA procedures undertaken for any reason. Of these, 4,033 used the DeltaMotion cup and 482,913 were modular designs. The DeltaMotion cup had the lowest CPR for all diagnoses compared to the modular bearings at all time points, had a significantly lower revision rate for prosthesis dislocation and no revisions for squeaking compared to other modular bearings. There were 175 ceramic breakages recorded in the modular bearing group and 1 ceramic breakage in the DeltaMotion group. The DeltaMotion cup had a low rate of all-cause revision, and for dislocation, ceramic breakage, and noise. Although this cup is no longer manufactured, ongoing follow-up of newer monoblock ceramic cups will determine their suitability for younger and more active patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing interest in the perioperative management of patients who have indications for hip and knee arthroplasty in the setting of modifiable risk factors such as morbid obesity, poorly controlled diabetes, and smoking. A recent survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) found that 95% of respondents address modifiable risk factors prior to surgery. The aim of this study was to poll Australian arthroplasty surgeons regarding their approach to patients who have modifiable risk factors. The survey tool used in the AAHKS study was adapted for use in the Australian context and distributed to the membership of the Arthroplasty Society of Australia via SurveyMonkey. There were 77 responses received, representing a response rate of 64%. The majority of respondents were experienced, high volume arthroplasty surgeons. Overall, 91% of respondents restricted access to arthroplasty for patients who have modifiable risk factors. There were 72% restricting access for excessive body mass index, 85% for poor diabetic control, and 46% for smoking. Most respondents made decisions based on personal experience or literature review rather than hospital or departmental pressures. While 49% of surgeons believed that current payment systems did not impair their ability to achieve good outcomes, 58% believed that certain arthroplasty patients would benefit from additional intervention, based on their socioeconomic status. Over 90% of surgeons who responded address modifiable risk factors prior to surgery. This finding aligns with the practice patterns of AAHKS members, despite differences in healthcare systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of robotic assistance in arthroplasty is increasing; however, the spectrum of adverse events potentially associated with this technology is unclear. Improved understanding of the causes of adverse events in robotic-assisted arthroplasty can prevent future incidents and enhance patient outcomes.Methods: Adverse event reports to the US Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database involving robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and partial knee arthroplasty were reviewed to determine causes of malfunction and related patient impact.Results: Overall, 263 adverse event reports were included. The most frequently reported adverse events were unexpected robotic arm movement for TKA (59/204, 28.9%) and retained registration checkpoint for THA (19/44, 43.2%). There were 99 reports of surgical delay with an average delay of 20 minutes (range 1-120). Thirty-one cases reported conversion to manual surgery. In total, 68 patient injuries were reported, 7 of which required surgical reintervention. Femoral notching (12/36, 33.3%) was the most common for TKA and retained registration checkpoint (19/28, 67.9%) was the most common for THA. Although rare, additional reported injuries included femoral, tibial, and acetabular fractures, MCL laceration, additional retained foreign bodies, and an electrical burn.Conclusion: Despite the increasing utilization of robotic-assisted arthroplasty in the United States, numerous adverse events are possible and technical difficulties experienced intraoperatively can result in prolonged surgical delays. The events reported herein seem to indicate that robotic-assisted arthroplasty is generally safe with only a few reported instances of serious complications, the nature of which seems more related to suboptimal surgical technique than technology. Based on our data, the practice of adding registration checkpoints and bone pins to the instrument count of all robotic-assisted TJA cases should be widely implemented to avoid unintended retained foreign objects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication after total joint arthroplasty that exacts a substantial economic burden on the health-care system. This study used break-even analysis to investigate whether the use of silver-impregnated occlusive dressings is a cost-effective measure for preventing PJI after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA).Methods: Baseline infection rates after TKA and THA, the cost of revision arthroplasty for PJI, and the cost of a silver-impregnated occlusive dressing were determined based on institutional data and the existing literature. A break-even analysis was then conducted to calculate the minimal absolute risk reduction needed for cost-effectiveness.Results: The use of silver-impregnated occlusive dressings would be economically viable at an infection rate of 1.10%, treatment costs of $25,692 for TKA PJI, and $31,753 for THA PJI and our institutional dressing price of $38.05 if it reduces infection rates after TKA by 0.15% (the number needed to treat [NNT] = 676) and THA by 0.12% (NNT = 835). The absolute risk reduction needed to maintain cost-effectiveness did not change with varying initial infection rates and remained less than 0.40% (NNT = 263) for infection treatment costs as low as $10,000 and less than 0.80% (NNT = 129) for dressing prices as high as $200.Conclusion: The use of silver-impregnated occlusive dressings is a cost-effective measure for infection prophylaxis after TKA and THA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The declining popularity of cemented acetabular components is incongruous, given the published results of prostheses implanted using contemporary techniques. The outcome of arthroplasty has previously been demonstrated to correlate with surgeon experience and volume of practice. We aim to explore if surgeon volume alters outcomes of cemented acetabular components based on survivorship data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR).Methods: An observational study was undertaken using a cohort of 22,956 patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis in the period 2003-2016 in whom cemented acetabular components were implanted. The cohort was stratified by age (greater than or less than 65 years) and annualized surgical volume of ≤10, >10-≤25, and >25 cases.Results: Stratified by age and volume, there was a protective benefit against revision conveyed at volume thresholds of 10 cases per annum and 25 cases per annum for patients ≥65 years of age and <65 years of age, respectively.Conclusion: Cemented total hip arthroplasty has excellent survivorship out to 15 years based on AOANJRR data. This survivorship is further improved if surgeons perform a higher volume of cases, with >25 cases conferring the greatest benefit. The AOANJRR data set is used to define best practice; surgeons who choose to utilize cemented acetabular fixation should be encouraged to perform this technique in adequate volumes to minimize revision risk and ensure the preservation of this important surgical skill set. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the risk of long-term dependence following the opioid treatment of musculoskeletal injury is often studied in younger populations, studies in older patients have centered on short-term risks such as oversedation and delirium. This study investigated prolonged opioid usage after hip fracture in older individuals, focusing on prevalence, risk factors, and changes over time. In this retrospective cohort study of 47,309 opioid-naïve patients aged ≥ 60 years who underwent hip fracture surgery (2009 to 2020), outpatient opioid use was evaluated in 3 postoperative time periods: P1 (day 0 to 30 postsurgery); P2 (day 31 to 90); and P3 (day 91 to 180). The primary outcome was prolonged outpatient opioid use, defined as having one or more opioid prescriptions dispensed in all 3 time periods. The incidence of prolonged opioid usage among patients surviving to P3 was 6.3% (2,834 of 44,850). Initial prescription quantities decreased over time, as did the risk of prolonged opioid usage (from 8.0% in 2009 to 3.9% in 2019). In the multivariable analyses, risk factors for prolonged opioid usage included younger age, women, current/former smoking, fracture fixation (as compared to hemiarthroplasty), and anxiety. Prolonged opioid usage was less common among patients who were Asian or had a history of dementia. While prior research on the hazards of opioids in the elderly has focused on short-term risks such as oversedation and delirium, these findings suggest that prolonged opioid usage may be a risk for this older population as well. As initial prescription amounts have decreased, declines in prolonged opioid medication usage have also been observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Matt and polished femoral stems have been historically grouped together in registry assessment of the outcome of cemented femoral stems in total hip arthroplasty. This is despite differences in the mode of fixation and biomechanics of loading. The aims of this study are to compare the survivorship of polished tapered stems with matt finished cemented stems.Methods: Data on primary total hip arthroplasty undertaken for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis from September 1999 to December 2014 were included from a National Joint Registry. Revision rates of the 2 different types of femoral components were compared.Results: There were 96,315 cemented femoral stems included, of which 82,972 were polished tapered and 13,343 matt finish. The cumulative percent revision at 14 years of polished stems was 3.6% (3.0-4.2) compared to 4.9% (4.1-5.7) for matt finish stems. Polished tapered stems had a significantly lower revision rate of femoral revision (hazard ratio 0.56, P < .001). This difference is evident in patients aged <75, and becomes apparent in the mid-term and continues to increase with time. Aseptic loosening accounts for 75% of revisions of matt finish stems compared to 20% for polished tapered stems.Conclusion: Although both polished and matt finish stems have excellent early to mid-term results, the long-term survivorship of polished stems is significantly better, with aseptic loosening becoming an issue with matt finish stems. In the future reports of cement fixation for femoral stems may benefit from separate analysis of polished and matt finish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) femoral stems are the most commonly selected prostheses in the United States. Optimal stem geometry remains controversial with excellent survivorship reported for many designs. We compared cause-specific stem revision of single-wedge versus double-wedge designs from a multicenter US cohort. Data from an integrated healthcare network's total joint replacement registry were used to conduct a cohort study. Primary elective cementless THAs were identified (2001 to 2018). Implant exposure groups were classified by design geometry using the system proposed by Khanuja et al. Type 1 single-wedge (n = 11,082) and type 2 double-wedge (n = 32,380) designs were compared, and other design types were excluded; the final study cohort comprised 43,462 THAs. Cause-specific multivariable Cox regressions were used to evaluate risk for revision due to infection or aseptic reasons, including loosening, instability, periprosthetic fracture, or other reasons. After adjustment for covariates, a higher aseptic revision risk was observed for type 1 when compared to type 2 designs (hazard ratio = 1.91, 95% confidence interval = 1.33-2.75). When looking at specific revision reasons, revision for aseptic loosening (hazard ratio = 3.46, 95% confidence interval = 2.24-5.34) was higher for type 1 versus type 2 designs. No differences were found for septic revision, instability, periprosthetic fracture, or revisions for other reasons. Type 1 single-wedge designs were found to have a higher risk of revision due to aseptic loosening relative to type 2 double-wedge designs. Femoral stem geometry should be considered when selecting a cementless femoral implant. Level III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dislocation is a leading cause of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although more common in the first few years after the procedure, dislocation can occur at any time. This study investigated the difference in late dislocation in ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings compared with metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-polyethylene bearings in THA.Methods: Data were used from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, and the cumulative percent revision for dislocation was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method for the different bearing surfaces. There were 192,275 THAs included in the study with 101,915 metal-on-cross-linked polyethylene (MoXLPE), 30,256 ceramic-on-cross-linked polyethylene (CoXLPE), and 60,104 CoC.Results: The cumulative percent revision for dislocation at 13 years for MoXLPE, CoXLPE, and CoC groups was 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.3), 1.0 (95% CI, 0.7-1.4), and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.8-1.1), respectively. There was an increased risk of revision for dislocation for MoXLPE compared with CoXLPE and CoC. When stratified for head size, there was no difference in the risk of revision for dislocation between MoXLPE, CoXLPE, and CoC in the 28- and 32-mm head sizes. With a head size of 36 mm, MoXLPE had a higher rate of dislocation compared with other materials.Conclusion: Bearing surface has little impact on revision for dislocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The clinical benefits of robotic-assisted technology in total joint arthroplasty are unclear, but its use is increasing. This study employed online crowdsourcing to explore public perceptions and beliefs regarding robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery.Methods: A 30-question survey was completed by 588 members of the public using Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants answered questions regarding robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery, sociodemographic factors, and validated assessments of health literacy and patient engagement. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to determine population characteristics associated with preference for robotic technology.Results: Most respondents believe robotic-assisted surgery leads to better results (69%), fewer complications (69%), less pain (59%), and faster recovery (62%) than conventional manual methods. About half (49%) would prefer a low-volume surgeon using robotic technology to a high-volume surgeon using conventional manual methods. The 3 main concerns regarding robotic technology included lack of surgeon experience with robotic surgery, robot malfunction causing harm, and increased cost. Only half of respondents accurately understand the actual role of the robot in the operating room. Overall, 34% of participants have a clear preference for robotic-assisted surgery over a conventional manual approach. After multivariable regression analysis, Asian race, working in healthcare, early technology adoption, and prior knowledge of robotic surgery were independent predictors of preferring robotic-assisted surgery.Conclusion: The public's unawareness of the dubious outcome superiority associated with robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery may contribute to misinformed decisions in some patients. Robotic-assisted technology appears to be a powerful marketing tool for surgeons and hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]