Search

Background: Standard resections according to the TKR manufacturers can lead to unnecessary bone resections in some patients. The objective of this study was to determine in which patients is recommended to perform a minimal tibial resection (MTR) that could restore the joint line height (JLH). Methods: Navigation records of 108 consecutive posterior cruciate-substituting TKR performed by one surgeon were analyzed. Optimal tibial resection depth to restore the JLH (0 mm) was calculated by an algorithm. Postoperatively, the knees were distributed in two groups: those in which a MTR (depth ≤ 8 mm) would have been enough to restore the JLH and those in which a standard resection depth would have been necessary. ROC curves and Youden index were used to determine the cutoff point of the coronal and sagittal mechanical axis that predicted a MTR restoring the JLH. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent factors associated with requiring an MTR. Results: A MTR could be required in 20 (18.5%) knees. In the ROC curve analyses, the cutoff points that best discriminated between minimal and standard tibial resection was ≤ 3° of varus and < 2° of flexion preoperative deformity. Multivariate analysis showed that female gender and preoperative flexion < 2° were significant predictors of requiring a MTR to restore JLH. Conclusion: A MTR with the JLH restoration could be possible in female patients with a preoperative sagittal deformity less than 2° of flexion. Preoperative coronal alignment had no influence to discriminate when a MTR is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The main objective was to analyze the computer-assisted navigation (CAN)-specific complications that forced to switch to conventional procedure in primary total knee replacement (TKR). The secondary objective was to determine the influence of those complications on TKR short-term survival. Methods: Retrospective study of 878 primary TKR in 753 patients. Two consecutive versions of the OrthoPilot navigation system (Braun Aesculap, Germany) were used during the study time. Specific complications of CAN were defined as those due to the instrumentation (hardware or software failures), which were classified in one of two categories according to whether they occurred during the registration or tracking process. Results: There were 20 (2.3%) complications related to the navigation system use that forced to switch to conventional surgery: in 11 (1.2%) knees due to loosening of the tracking pins, and in the other nine (1.0%) there were information system failures. There was a trend for a higher conversion rate to conventional surgery with the use of the first version of the software. There were no fractures, infections, or nerve injuries at the pin site. We found no differences in the distribution of baseline variables among those with or without conversion to conventional surgery. There was no significant difference (p = 0.488) in the two year survival between patients with or without conversion. Conclusion: CAN for primary TKR is a safe method with few specific complications that forced to switch from the navigated to the conventional procedure. Conversion to conventional surgery did not affect the short-term survival of TKR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Hip fracture registries have helped improve quality of care and reduce variability, and several audits exist worldwide. The results of the Spanish National Hip Fracture Registry are presented and compared with 13 other national registries, highlighting similarities and differences to define areas of improvement, particularly surgical delay and early mobilization. Introduction: Hip fracture audits have been useful for monitoring current practice and defining areas in need of improvement. Most established registries are from Northern Europe. We present the results from the first annual report of the Spanish Hip Fracture Registry (RNFC) and compare them with other publically available audit reports. Method: Comparison of the results from Spain with the most recent reports from another ten established hip fracture registries highlights the differences in audit characteristics, casemix, management, and outcomes. Results: Of the patients treated in 54 hospitals, 7.208 were included in the registry between January and October 2017. Compared with other registries, the RNFC included patients ≥ 75 years old; in general, they were older, more likely to be female, had a worse prefracture ambulation status, and were more likely to have extracapsular fractures. A larger proportion was treated with intramedullary nails than in other countries, and spinal anesthesia was most commonly used. With a mean of 75.7 h, Spain had by far the longest surgical delay, and the lowest proportion of patients mobilized on the first postoperative day (58.5%). Consequently, development of pressure ulcers was high, but length of stay, mortality, and discharge to home remained in the range of other audits. Conclusions: National hip fracture registries have proved effective in changing clinical practice and our understanding of patients with this condition. Such registries tend to be based on an internationally recognized common dataset which would make comparisons between national registries possible, but variations such as age inclusion criteria and follow-up are becoming evident across the world. This variation should be avoided if we are to maximize the comparability of registry results and help different countries learn from each other's practice. The results reported in the Spanish RNFC, compared with those of other countries, highlight the differences between countries and detect areas of improvement, particularly surgical delay and early mobilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Hip fracture is a major health care problem worldwide. Business process management systems (PMSs) have made significant contributions in health care environments to improve patient care standards. The effectiveness of PMS applied to hip fracture in older adults in the acute phase has been demonstrated.Introduction: Fragility fracture is a major health care problem worldwide. Business PMSs have made significant contributions in health care environments to improve patient care standards. It is a new way of management that defines a homogeneous application procedure involving eliminating steps that add no value and developing explicit supervision criteria, in addition to identifying the appropriate managers.Purpose: The aim of our trial was to assess the effectiveness of the PMS applied to hip fracture versus the orthogeriatric co-management model in the acute phase.Methods: All consecutive patients aged ≥ 65 who were admitted to Hospital Universitario Infanta Leonor between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2016, for acute hip fracture surgery were included. We compared the effectiveness indicators in the acute phase between the preprocess period (orthogeriatric co-management) and the process period.Results: One thousand two hundred twenty-two patients were included (76.6% women). Mean age (SD) was 83.9 (6.4) years. Effectiveness management indicators are the following: length of hospital stay, time to admission to the ward from the emergency department, preoperative stay, surgery in < 48 h, and the operating room availability which were all improved in the process period with statistical significance. Effectiveness clinical indicators are the following: the numbers of patients with operated limb loading approved after surgery, discharged to home, and with osteoporosis treatment postfracture at the time of discharge which were statistically significantly higher in the process period, and the number of patients who suffered from delirium was statistically significantly lower in the process period. The number of in-hospital deaths was lower during the process period without statistical significance.Conclusion: Our results demonstrated the effectiveness of the PMS applied to hip fracture in older adults compared with an orthogeriatric co-management model in the acute phase, based on both management indicators and clinical indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine whether the use of a surgical navigation system in total knee replacement (TKR) enables beginner and intermediate surgeons to achieve clinical PROM outcomes as good as those conducted by expert surgeons in the long term., Methods: We enrolled 100 consecutive patients whose total navigated knee arthroplasty (TKA) was performed in our institution from 2008 to 2010. According to the principal surgeon's surgical experience, the patients were divided into three groups: (1) beginner surgeons, with no more than 30 previous knee replacement performances, (2) intermediate surgeons, with more than 30 but not more than 300, and (3) expert surgeons, with more than 300 knee replacements. Demographic data collected on the cohort included gender, laterality, age, and body mass index (BMI). The outcome measures assessed were Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), implant positioning, limb alignment, and prosthesis survival rate. A margin of equivalence of ± 18.5 points in the FJS scale was prespecified in terms of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) to compare the FJS results obtained in the long period between the groups of interest., Results: The mean follow-up was 11.10 ± 0.78, 10.86 ± 0.66, and 11.30 ± 0.74 years, respectively, for each of the groups. The long-term FJS mean score was 80.86 ± 21.88, 81.36 ± 23.87, and 90.48 ± 14.65 for each group. The statistical analysis proved noninferiority and equivalence in terms of the FJS results reported in the long term by patients in Groups 1 or 2 compared to those in Group 3. More specifically, it has been proved that the mean difference between groups is within the interval of equivalence defined in terms of the MCID. The overall prostheses survival rate was 93.7%., Conclusion: Navigated assisted TKA, under expert guidance, can be as effective when performed by beginner or intermediate surgeons as performed by senior surgeons regarding the accuracy of implant positioning, limb alignment, and long-term clinical outcome., Competing Interests: Conflict of InterestThe author R. Larrainzar-Garijo is a paid consultant who receives royalties from B-Braun Aesculap. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare concerning this study., (© The Author(s) 2022.)