Search

Aims: Implant waste during total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a significant cost to the USA healthcare system. While studies have explored methods to improve THA cost-effectiveness, the literature comparing the proportions of implant waste by intraoperative technology used during THA is limited. The aims of this study were to: 1) examine whether the use of enabling technologies during THA results in a smaller proportion of wasted implants compared to navigation-guided and conventional manual THA; 2) determine the proportion of wasted implants by implant type; and 3) examine the effects of surgeon experience on rates of implant waste by technology used. Methods: We identified 104,420 implants either implanted or wasted during 18,329 primary THAs performed on 16,724 patients between January 2018 and June 2022 at our institution. THAs were separated by technology used: robotic-assisted (n = 4,171), imageless navigation (n = 6,887), and manual (n = 7,721). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of implant waste during primary THA. Results: Robotic-assisted THA resulted in a lower proportion (1.5%) of implant waste compared to navigation-guided THA (2.0%) and manual THA (1.9%) (all p < 0.001). Both navigated and manual THA were more likely to waste acetabular shells (odds ratio (OR) 4.5 vs 3.1) and polyethylene liners (OR 2.2 vs 2.0) compared to robotic-assisted THA after adjusting for demographic and perioperative factors, such as surgeon experience (p < 0.001). While implant waste decreased with increasing experience for procedures performed manually (p < 0.001) or with navigation (p < 0.001), waste rates for robotic-assisted THA did not differ based on surgical experience. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted THAs wasted a smaller proportion of acetabular shells and polyethylene liners than navigation-guided and manual THAs. Individual implant waste rates vary depending on the type of technology used intraoperatively. Future studies on implant waste during THA should examine reasons for non-implantation in order to better understand and develop methods for cost-saving. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):715–720.

Background: Deviation from planned component placement with robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RA-THA) may differ based on surgical approach. The purpose of this study was to compare radiographic accuracy and precision of acetabular component position using RA-THA with the direct anterior approach (DAA) or posterior approach (PA). Methods: Between 2016 and 2019, 134 PA RA-THA patients were matched to 134 DAA RA-THA patients based on age (±10 years), body mass index (±5 kg/m2), and sex (exact). Acetabular component position was assessed using (1) planned position on preoperative computed tomography, (2) intraoperative position, and (3) position on 6-week postoperative radiographs using the digital Ein Bild Röntgen Analyse system. Results: Accuracy of acetabular component inclination in the PA cohort was lower than that in the DAA cohort (PA: 4.3° ± 2.8° vs DAA: 3.1° ± 2.4°, P = .001). Inclination precision was not statistically different (PA: 3° ± 2.4° vs DAA: 2.5° ± 1.8°, P = .071). Anteversion accuracy was not statistically different (PA: 4.1° ± 3.7° vs DAA: 3.5° ± 2.5°, P = .091). Acetabular component anteversion was more precise with DAA (PA: 4.1° ± 3.7° vs DAA: 2.9° ± 2.0°, P = .001). Radiographic outliers (anteversion or inclination was >10° or

Background: Instability is a common indication for revision after total knee arthroplasty. Replacement of multiple components is the current standard, but isolated polyethylene liner exchange (IPE) may present a less-morbid alternative. This study aims to determine (1) whether IPE results in similar rerevision frequency to component revision in select patients with symptomatic instability and (2) the effect of increasing constraint on the outcome. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 117 patients revised for symptomatic total knee arthroplasty instability from January 2016 to December 2017. The component revision (60 patients) or IPE (57 patients) cohorts were further stratified based on whether constraint was increased or not. The primary objective was to compare rerevision rates 2 years after component revision vs IPE. The secondary objectives consisted of evaluating reasons for rerevision, preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, and range of motion. Results: The rerevision rate was 18%, with no statistical difference between component and IPE cohorts. Cases where level of constraint increased due to revision, a significantly lower rate of rerevision was detected (9 of 77) (12%) than in cases where constraint did not increase (12 of 39) (31%) (P=0.012). This association was also noted in the component revision cohort but not in the IPE cohort (P=0.011). Conclusions: Rerevision occurred at similar frequencies 2 years after IPE or component revision for total knee arthroplasty instability. For component revision, increased constraint was associated with significantly fewer rerevisions.

Background: The impact of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection on the morbidity of elective total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is not fully understood. This study reports on the association between previous COVID-19 disease, hospital length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital complications after elective primary TJA. Methods: Demographics, comorbidities, LOS, and in-hospital complications of consecutive 340 patients with a history of COVID-19 were compared with those of 5014 patients without a history of COVID-19 undergoing TJA. History of COVID-19 was defined as a positive IgG antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 before surgery. All patients were given both antibody and polymerase chain reaction tests before surgery. Results: Patients with a history of COVID-19 were more likely to be obese (43.8% vs 32.4%, P < .001), Black (15.6% vs 6.8%, P < .001), or Hispanic (8.5% vs 5.4%, P = .028) than patients without a history of COVID-19. COVID-19 treatment was reported by 6.8% of patients with a history of COVID-19. Patients with a history of COVID-19 did not have a significantly longer median LOS after controlling for other factors (for hip replacements, median 2.9 h longer, 95% confidence interval = −2.0 to 7.8, P = .240; for knee replacements, median 4.1 h longer, 95% confidence interval = −2.4 to 10.5, P = .214), but a higher percentage were discharged to a post–acute care facility (4.7% vs 1.9%, P = .001). There was no significant difference in in-hospital complication rates between the 2 groups (0/340 = 0.0% vs 22/5014 = 0.44%, P = .221). Conclusions: We do not find differences in LOS or in-hospital complications between the 2 groups. However, more work is needed to confirm these findings, particularly for patients with a history of more severe COVID-19. Level of evidence: II.

Background: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to an increase in telehealth utilization across the health-care sector. It is unknown if telehealth use among hip and knee arthroplasty clinics has remained an important health-care delivery platform. The purpose of the present study was to analyze telehealth utilization before and for 1 year during the pandemic among four varied hip and knee arthroplasty clinics. Methods: Retrospective data were available from four regionally diverse hip and knee arthroplasty centers. Data on volume of patient visits, demographics, visit types (new visit, follow-up, postoperative visit, other), and visit modality (in-person, telehealth, telephone) were available from January 2020 through April 2021. Data from the centers were analyzed as a total and separately, using chi-squared and Fisher exact tests. Results: Among the four centers, there were 296,540 hip and knee arthroplasty outpatient clinic visits between January 2020 and April 2021. Of those, 15,240 (5%) were telehealth visits. Before March 2020, less than 0.1% of visits across centers occurred over telehealth. The highest utilization of telehealth visits occurred in March 2020 (>55%) and April 2020 (>25%). From August 2020 until April 2021, telehealth visits accounted for 2%-3% of total visits. Younger patients (

Background: Efficient resource management is becoming more important as the demand for total hip arthroplasty (THA) increases. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the ability of linear regression and Bayesian statistics in predicting implant size for THA using patient demographic variables. Material and methods: A retrospective, single-institution joint-replacement registry review was performed on patients who underwent primary THA from 2005 to 2019. Demographic information was obtained along with primary THA implant data. A total of 11,730 acetabular and 8536 femoral components were included. A multivariable regression model was created on a training cohort of 80% of the sample and applied to the validation cohort (remaining 20%). Bayesian posterior probability methods were applied to the training cohort and then tested in the validation cohort to determine the 1%, 5%, and 10% error tolerance thresholds. Results: The most predictive regression model included height, weight, and sex (cup: R2 = 0.57, all P < .001; stem mediolateral size [M/L]: R2 = 0.32, all P < .001). Removing weight had a minimal effect and resulted in a more parsimonious model (cup: R2 = 0.56, all P < .001; stem M/L: R2 = 0.32, all P < .001). Applying the posterior probability estimate to the validation cohort in the Bayesian model using height, weight, and sex demonstrated high accuracy in predicting the range of required implant sizes (95.3% cup and 90.4% stem M/L size). Conclusion: Implant size in THA is correlated with demographic variables to accurately predict implant size using Bayesian modeling. Predictive models such as linear regression and Bayesian modeling can be used to improve operating room efficiency, supply chain inventory management, and decrease costs associated with THA.

Background and purpose: Elective total hip replacement (THR) was halted in our institution during the COVID-19 surge in March 2020. Afterwards, elective THR volume increased with emphasis on fast-track protocols, early discharge, and post-discharge virtual care. We compare early outcomes during this “return-to-normal period” with those of a matched pre-pandemic cohort. Patients and methods: We identified 757 patients undergoing THR from June to August 2020, who were matched 1:1 with a control cohort from June to August 2019. Length of stay (LOS) for the study cohort was lower than the control cohort (31 vs. 45 hours; p < 0.001). The time to first postoperative physical therapy (PT) was shorter in the study cohort (370 vs. 425 minutes; p < 0.001). More patients were discharged home in the study cohort (99% vs. 94%; p < 0.001). Study patients utilized telehealth office and rehabilitation services 14 times more frequently (39% vs. 2.8%; p < 0.001). Outcomes included post-discharge 90-day unscheduled office visits, emergency room (ER) visits, complications, readmissions, and PROMs (HOOS JR, and VR-12 mental/physical). Mann–Whitney U and chi-square tests were used for group comparisons. Results: Rates of 90-day unscheduled outpatient visits (5.0% vs. 7.3%), ER visits (5.0% vs. 4.8%), hospital readmissions (4.0% vs. 2.8%), complications (0.04% vs. 0.03%), and 3-month PROMs were similar between cohorts. There was no 90-day mortality. Interpretation: A reduction in LOS and increased telehealth use for office and rehabilitation visits did not adversely influence 90-day clinical outcomes and PROMs. Our findings lend further support for the utilization of fast-track arthroplasty with augmentation of postoperative care delivery using telemedicine.

This article was updated on September 19, 2018, because of a previous error. On page 1546, in the section titled "Discussion," the sentence that had read "Although a significant improvement was found in the vast majority of the inactive group, surprisingly, a majority of the active group (72.7%) reported a decrease in their activity levels below their baseline at 5 to 10 years postoperatively." now reads "Although a significant improvement was found in the vast majority of the inactive group, surprisingly, a majority of the active group (72.7%) reported no change or a decrease in their activity levels below their baseline at 5 to 10 years postoperatively."Background: Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty expect pain relief, functional improvement, and a return to physical activity. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of patients' baseline physical activity level on preoperative expectations, postoperative satisfaction, and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.Methods: Using an institutional registry from 2007 to 2012, we retrospectively identified patients who underwent a unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and completed a preoperative Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS), a Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Replacement Expectations Survey (HSS-KRES), and a Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) evaluation in addition to 2-year KOOS and satisfaction evaluations. Active patients were defined by an LEAS level of 13 to 18. Active patients (n = 1,008) were matched to inactive patients (n = 1,008) by age, sex, body mass index, and comorbidities. The cohorts were compared with regard to the association of expectations with KOOS and satisfaction, the change in LEAS level from baseline to 2 years, complications, and revision surgical procedures. Multivariable analyses identified predictors of satisfaction, KOOS, and revision surgical procedures.Results: Significantly more active patients (68.2%) expected to be back to normal with regard to the ability to exercise and participate in sports compared with inactive patients (55.5%; p < 0.0001). Although overall satisfaction was equivalent, active patients were more commonly very satisfied with regard to the ability to do recreational activities (67.2% compared with 57.7%; p = 0.001). There were no associations between expectations and satisfaction or outcomes. Only the inactive patient group improved in activity level at 2 years. At 2 years, 69.5% of the inactive patients and 27.3% of the active patients improved upon their baseline activity levels (p < 0.0001). Complications rates were similar. The revision rate was higher for active patients (3.2%) compared with inactive patients (1.6%) at 5 to 10 years postoperatively (p = 0.019).Conclusions: At 2 years following total knee arthroplasty, inactive patients improved from baseline activity levels and active patients did not. Active patients had an elevated revision risk. Therefore, active patients should be carefully counseled regarding total knee arthroplasty to give them an understanding of its limitations and the potential risk of future revision.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]