Search

Background: Robotic-assisted arthroplasty is a growing alternative to conventionally instrumented arthroplasty; however, the incidence of adverse events (AEs) associated with this technology reported to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) remains poorly quantified. The objective of this study was to categorize AEs associated with robotic-assisted arthroplasty and calculate their annual incidence as reported to the FDA., Methods: The FDA's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database was queried for AEs from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021 associated with the most prevalent robotic-arthroplasty system. The AEs were calculated using national surgical numbers provided by the manufacturer and grouped by total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), or partial knee arthroplasty (PKA)., Results: There were 1,710 unique AEs across the study period, with 436 THA, 1,005 TKA, and 269 PKA, representing incidence rates of 0.37, 0.30, and 0.40%, respectively. All procedures demonstrated lower rates of AEs in the final year of the study, compared to the first year. Most complications were related to mechanical problems, not software issues. Surgical delays due to AEs occurred in THA (0.13% cumulative incidence, 14.0 minutes average delay), TKA (0.13%, 20.6 minutes), and PKA (0.22%, 19.4 minutes). No cases were canceled due to AEs in THA, though a few TKA (0.003%) and PKA (0.02%) cases were not performed. Patient injuries occurred in 0.05, 0.05, and 0.08% of THA, TKA, and PKA, respectively. Surgical reintervention was necessary in 0.004, 0.003, and 0.01% of THA, TKA, and PKA, respectively., Conclusions: Robotic-assisted arthroplasty has a small number and relatively low rate of AEs reported to the FDA as measured through the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database, with rates steadily decreasing over the study period. Patient injury, case delay, and reoperation represent only a small fraction of the already rare AEs in the database., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of administrative databases in arthroplasty research has increased over the past decade. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) is one of the first and most frequently used. Despite many published articles using this dataset, there exists no standardization resource accounting for the potential of biased results. The purpose of our study was to assess the amount of discordant data between clinically relevant variables and propose a standard for using this database in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA)., Methods: An initial set of patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty were identified from the NIS between 2016 and 2019 using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Procedure Coding System. All records with THA and TKA in any of the procedure variables (PR1-PR20) were included. A total of 63 relevant and consistent variables were selected for individual comparison including diagnosis-related group (1), elective (1), procedure codes (20), day of main procedure (1), and diagnosis codes (40). Descriptive statistics were used. A total of 3,562,819 patients were included in the initial set., Results: Using diagnosis-related groups, 5.3% were revision surgeries, 4.7% were not elective, 2.3% did not have THA or TKA as their primary procedure for hospitalization, and 2.9% of THA and 9.7% of TKA were bilateral. A total of 6.2% of the surgeries were done day(s) before or after admission, and 10.8% of THA and 6.3% of TKA were missing an orthopedic diagnosis for admission. Many had multiple orthopedic diagnoses for admission, 3.2% of THA and 0.7% of TKA. Overall miscoding was 23.3%., Conclusions: Using the NIS without standardized data processing to study elective, unilateral, primary THA and TKA introduces major bias. A logical and stepwise approach to curate the data before analysis is proposed to improve research quality when using this database in hip and knee arthroplasty studies., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of technology allows surgeons increased precision in component positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to compare (1) perioperative complications and (2) resource utilizations between robotic-assisted (RA) and computer-navigated (CN) versus conventional instrumenttaion (CI) THA., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using a large national database to identify patients undergoing unilateral, primary elective THA from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019 using RA, CN, or CI. There were 1,372,300 total patients identified and included RA (29,735), CN (28,480), and CI (1,314,085) THA. Demographics, complications, lengths of stay, dispositions, and costs were compared between the cohorts. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed., Results: The use of RA THA led to lower rates of intraoperative fracture (0.22% versus 0.39%), delirium (0.1% versus 0.2%), postoperative anemia (14.4% versus 16.7%), higher myocardial infarction (0.13% versus 0.08%), renal failure (1.7% versus 1.6%), blood transfusion (2.0% versus 1.9%), and wound dehiscence (0.02% versus 0.01%) compared to CI THA. The use of CN led to lower rates of respiratory complication (0.5% versus 0.8%), renal failure (1.1% versus 1.6%), blood transfusion (1.3% versus 1.9%), and pulmonary embolism (0.02% versus 0.1%) compared to CI THA. Total costs were increased in RA ($17,729 versus $15,977) and CN ($22,529 versus $15,977). Lengths of hospital stay were decreased in RA (1.8 versus 1.9 days) and CN (1.7 versus 1.9 days)., Conclusions: Perioperative complication rates vary in technology-assisted THA, with higher rates in RA THA and lower rates in CN THA, relative to CI THA. Both RA THA and CN THA were associated with more costs, shorter postoperative hospital stays, and higher rates of discharge home compared to CI THA., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of technology allows increased precision in component positioning in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objectives of this study were to compare (1) perioperative complications and (2) resource utilization between robotic-assisted (RA) and computer-navigated (CN) versus conventional (CI) TKA., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using a national database to identify patients undergoing unilateral, primary elective TKA from January 2016 to December 2019. A total of 2,174,685 patients were identified and included RA (69,445), CN (112,225), or CI (1,993,015) TKA. Demographics, complications, lengths of stay, dispositions, and costs were compared between the cohorts. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed., Results: The RA TKA cohort had lower rates of intraoperative fracture (0.05 versus 0.08%, P < .05), respiratory complications (0.6 versus 1.1%, P < .05), renal failure (1.3 versus 1.7%, P < .05), delirium (0.1 versus 0.2%, P < .05), gastrointestinal complications (0.04 versus 0.09%, P < .05), postoperative anemia (8.9 versus 13.9%, P < .05), blood transfusion (0.4 versus 0.9%, P < .05), pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis (0.1 versus 0.2%, P < .05), and mortality (0.01 versus 0.02%, P < .05) compared to conventional TKA, though the cohort did have higher rates of myocardial infarction (0.09 versus 0.07%, P < .05). The CN cohort had lower rates of myocardial infarction (0.02 versus 0.07%, P < .05), respiratory complications (0.8 versus 1.1%, P < .05), renal failure (1.5 versus 1.7%, P < .05), blood transfusion (0.8 versus 0.9%, P < .05), pulmonary embolism (0.08 versus 0.2%, P < .05), and deep vein thrombosis (0.2 versus 0.2%, P < .05) over CI TKA. Total cost was increased in RA (16,190 versus $15,133, P < .05) and CN (17,448 versus $15,133, P < .05). However, the length of hospital stay was decreased in both RA (1.8 versus 2.2 days, P < .05) and CN (2.1 versus 2.2 days, P < .05)., Conclusions: Technology-assisted TKA was associated with lower perioperative complication rates and faster recovery., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess proximal femoral replacement as a treatment solution for nonunion of pathologic subtrochanteric fractures after cephalomedullary nailing in patients with pathological fracture and previously irradiated bone., Methods: Retrospective review of five patients with pathological subtrochanteric femoral fractures that were treated with cephalomedullary nailing and developed a nonunion, which was revised with conversion to a proximal endoprosthetic replacement., Results: All five patients had previously been treated with radiation. One patient had the latest follow-up at 2 months postoperatively. At that time, the patient was walking with a walker for assistance, with no evidence of hardware failure or loosening on imaging. The remaining four patients had the latest follow-up ranging from 9 to 20 months after surgery. At their latest follow-up, three of the four patients were ambulatory with no pain, using only a cane for assistance with longer distances. The other patient demonstrated pain in his affected thigh, utilizing a walker for assistance with ambulation at latest follow-up, but not requiring further surgical interventions. There were no hardware failures or implant loosening through the follow-up period. None of the patients required revision, and there were no postoperative complications observed at their last follow-up., Conclusions: In patients with pathological fractures in the subtrochanteric region that is treated with cephalomedullary nailing and developed a nonunion, treatment with conversion to a proximal femoral replacement with a mega prosthesis is a valuable treatment with good functional results and low risk for complications., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic level IV., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.)