Search

Background: Surgeons are familiar with the complication rates and risks of knee arthroscopy, but comparative data between hip arthroscopy and knee arthroscopy are lacking. Purpose: To compare complications in knee arthroscopy, the most common arthroscopic procedure, with those in hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective matched-cohort study analyzing patients who received a primary hip or knee arthroscopy was performed using the PearlDiver database. A total of 19,735 patients were identified for each cohort. Systemic complications and readmissions were assessed at 3 months postoperatively. Local complications and reoperations were assessed at 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months postoperatively. All categorical variables were compared using chi-square analysis. Results: Hip arthroscopy had significantly higher rates of nerve injury, stiffness, heterotopic ossification, and avascular necrosis (all P <.001) than knee arthroscopy at all observed time periods postoperatively. Hip arthroscopy also had a greater rate of all local joint complications than knee arthroscopy (16.79% vs 11.80%; P <.001). Knee arthroscopy was found to have higher incidences of deep vein thrombosis (0.98% vs 0.66%; P <.001) and myocardial infarction (0.06% vs 0.00%; P <.001) as well as a higher overall systemic complication rate (3.93% vs 3.44%; P =.013). Hip arthroscopy was found to have higher rates of subsequent arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and overall reoperation when compared with knee arthroscopy (11.99% vs 14.99%; P <.001) at all time periods up to 24 months postoperatively. Conclusion: Although the systemic complication rate was higher in knee arthroscopy, local joint complications, reoperation, and total complication rates were higher for hip arthroscopy. Surgeons should be aware of these potential differences to best discuss and mitigate risks with this expanding patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hip arthroscopy (HA) procedures have increased exponentially in recent years. Their effect on outcomes after subsequent total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unclear. Purpose: To compare rates of complications and opioid claims after elective THA among patients with prior HA versus controls. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent THA were identified in the PearlDiver database. Arthroplasty performed for hip fractures and hip avascular necrosis were excluded. Within this population, patients with HA before arthroplasty (n = 3156) were propensity score matched 1:1 with controls on age, sex, US region, and several comorbidities. Rates of medical complications within 90 days and prosthesis-related complications within 2 years were queried. The number of patients with an opioid claim within 0 to 30 days and subsequent opioid claim(s) during the 90-day global period were obtained to assess rates of prolonged opioid use after arthroplasty. Rates of postoperative complications and opioid claims were compared using logistic regression. Results: Patients with prior HA exhibited significantly lower rates of readmission (5.6% vs 7.3%; odds ratio [OR], 0.72), pulmonary embolism (0.2% vs 0.6%; OR, 0.45), urinary tract infection (3.1% vs 4.0%; OR, 0.75), and blood transfusion (3.6% vs 6.1%; OR, 0.55). The prior HA cohort also exhibited a significantly lower rate of prosthetic joint infection at 1 year postoperatively (0.6% vs 1.3%; OR, 0.50). Rates of dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, mechanical complications, and aseptic revision arthroplasty were statistically comparable between the cohorts within 2 years. The prior HA cohort was significantly less likely to file persistent opioid claims after 30 days postoperatively, including between 31 and 60 days (27.2% vs 33.1%; OR, 0.74) and 61 to 90 days (16.2% vs 20.9%; OR, 0.71). Conclusion: After elective THA, patients with prior HA exhibited significantly lower rates of medical complications and prolonged opioid claims within 90 days and prosthetic joint infection at 1 year. Rates of all other prosthesis-related complications within 2 years were statistically comparable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study highlights the persistent osteoporosis treatment gap following fragility fractures. Patients with multiple sclerosis sustained more primary hip fractures than controls and exhibited significantly higher rates of falls within three years post-fracture. However, multiple sclerosis (MS) patients were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with osteoporosis and treated with medications. Introduction: The purpose of this study was to compare rates of osteoporosis management, falls, and secondary fractures following primary fragility fractures among patients with MS versus matched controls. Materials and methods: A retrospective matched cohort study was conducted using the PearlDiver database. Patients aged ≥ 50 years with primary fragility fractures were identified (n = 120,368). Within this population, patients with MS were matched 1:10 with controls across age, sex, and US region. Rates of osteoporosis diagnoses and pharmacologic treatment, low-energy falls, and secondary fragility fractures were compared at three years post-fracture via logistic regression. Results: A total of 1,232 patients with MS (mean age, 65.7 years) with primary fragility fractures were matched with 12,320 controls (mean age, 65.8 years). Primary hip fractures were significantly more common in the MS cohort (47.4% vs. 34.2%, p < 0.001). After the initial fracture, patients with MS were significantly more likely to receive a formal osteoporosis diagnosis (12.9% vs. 9.7%; OR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13–1.61) and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy (14.4% vs. 11.9%; OR 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04–1.46). The MS cohort also exhibited significantly higher rates of falls (27.8% vs 22.7%; OR 1.15; 95% CI, 1.01–1.32). Rates of secondary fractures were comparable (6.3% vs. 5.0%; OR 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85–1.40). Conclusion: Primary hip fragility fractures were significantly more common in patients with MS compared to matched controls. Following an initial fracture, patients with MS exhibited a significantly higher rate of falls but were more likely to be diagnosed with osteoporosis and treated with medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to increasing rates of self-reported latex allergies, changes have been made to prevent anaphylaxis in the operating room, including the use of latex-free gloves. However, the impact of these changes on the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after arthroplasty is unclear. This study evaluated whether documented latex allergy is an independent risk factor for PJI and aseptic revision surgery after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A retrospective matched cohort study was conducted with an administrative claims database. A total of 17,501 patients who underwent TKA and had documented latex allergy were matched 1:4 with 70,004 control subjects, and 8221 patients who underwent THA and had documented latex allergy were matched 1:4 with 32,884 control subjects. Multivariable logistic regression showed that patients who had TKA and had a latex allergy showed significantly higher risk of PJI at both 90 days (odds ratio [OR], 1.26) and 1 year (OR, 1.22) and significantly higher risk of aseptic revision TKA at 1 year (OR, 1.21) after surgery compared with control subjects. Patients who had THA and had a latex allergy had significantly higher risk of PJI at 1 year (OR, 1.19) compared with control subjects. Rates of aseptic revision THA were higher in the latex allergy cohort but statistically comparable (P>.05). Latex allergy was associated with significantly increased risk of PJI and aseptic revision after TKA and significantly increased risk of PJI after THA. More work is needed to determine whether these risks can be mitigated or if latex allergy is an inherent, nonmodifiable risk factor requiring modification to typical arthroplasty pathways. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(4):244-250.]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]