Search

Dual mobility (DM) refers to a now widely available option for total hip articulation. DM implants feature a small inner head, a hard bearing, that connects via a taper fit onto the femoral trunnion. This head freely rotates but is encased inside a larger, outer polyethylene head that articulates with a smooth acetabular component.DM acetabular components are available in the form of a monoblock shell or as a liner that is impacted into a modular shell, providing a metal articulation for the polyethylene outer head.DM is designed to increase hip stability by providing the arthroplasty construct with a higher jump distance, head-to-neck ratio, and range of motion prior to impingement.The use of DM in total hip arthroplasty continues to increase in the United States for both primary and revision arthroplasty. Surgeons should be aware of the potential benefits and pitfalls.Long-term data are lacking, especially for modular DM implants. Points of concern include a potential for accelerated polyethylene wear, intraprosthetic dislocation, and modular backside fretting corrosion.

Evidence-based guidelines are lacking for return to driving following rotator cuff repair (RCR). As a result, surgeons are often overly conservative in their recommendations, placing potential undue burden on patients and their families. Therefore, the primary objective of this study was to formulate evidence-based return-to-driving guidelines.Thirty-two subjects planning to undergo primary RCR were enrolled. Driving fitness was assessed in a naturalistic setting with an instrumented vehicle on public streets with a safety monitor onboard. Driving kinematic measures and behavioral data were obtained from vehicle data and camera capture. Several driving tasks and maneuvers were evaluated, including parking, left and right turns, straightaways, yielding, highway merges, and U-turns. The total course length was 15 miles (24 km) and the course took 45 to 55 minutes to complete. The subjects' baseline drive was performed prior to RCR and postoperative drives occurred at 2, 4, 6, and 12 weeks after RCR. All drives consisted of identical routes, tasks, and maneuvers. Driving metrics were analyzed for differences between baseline and postoperative drives, including differences in gravitational force equivalents (g).Twenty-seven subjects (mean age, 58.6 years [range, 43 to 68 years]) completed all 5 drives. Of the 13 analyzed kinematic metrics measured from 14 of 17 driving events, all exhibited noninferiority across all postoperative drives (2 to 12 weeks) after RCR compared with baseline. Beginning at postoperative week 2, subjects generally braked less aggressively, steered more smoothly, and drove more stably. Kinematic metrics during the performance of specific maneuver types also showed noninferiority when compared with baseline. Of note, subjects drove more smoothly on highway merges starting at postoperative week 2 (minimum longitudinal acceleration, -0.35 g [95% confidence interval (CI), -0.050 to -0.019 g]; standard deviation of longitudinal acceleration, 0.008 g [95% CI, 0.003 to 0.013 g]), but exhibited more aggressive driving and acceleration on highway merges at postoperative week 12 (maximum absolute yaw, -0.8°/sec [95% CI, -1.2°/sec to -0.4°/sec]).Patients showed no clinically important negative impact on driving fitness as early as 2 weeks after RCR. Adaptive behaviors were present both preoperatively and postoperatively.Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

As no prior study has examined the citations profile of key articles related to periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), our analysis utilized the Web of Science database to (1) identify the most-cited clinical studies relating to PAO in the management of acetabular dysplasia and (2) assess any trends over time with respect to the quality of literature. The top 100 highest-cited studies related to PAO had a mean of 49 citations (range, 6-666 per study). With respect to the level of evidence, most studies had level IV evidence (58%); 1% level I, 16% level II, 28% level III and 2% level V. Most studies were retrospective ( n = 86); there were 14 prospective studies (including one randomized study). The most common study designs were case series ( n = 58) and cohort ( n = 16), followed by matched-cohort ( n = 13) and case-control ( n = 6). The mean ± SD Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score was 6.48 ± 1.31. A total of 59 and 41 of the included articles were classified as high risk and high quality, respectively. No studies were classified as very high risk. As a whole, our analysis demonstrated that currently available PAO literature is still of low quality and of low level of evidence. While PAO has been well-documented as a durable procedure for addressing acetabular dysplasia, future research must focus on higher quality, randomized and prospective data to answer key clinical or technique-related topics.

Although industry payments to physicians and surgeons remain a subject of controversy, relationships between industry and orthopaedic surgeons continue to grow. Notably, recent analyses have demonstrated significant increases in the rate and magnitude of payments among orthopaedic surgeons, despite the passing of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in 2010. Given the concerns regarding how these relationships may affect the peer-review process, our analysis aimed to evaluate how payments among editorial board members of orthopaedic journals have changed over a contemporary time frame.The Clarivate Analytics Impact Factor tool was used to identify all orthopaedic journals with a 2019 impact factor of ≥1.5. Editorial board members from these respective journals were identified from each journal's website. Subsequently, the Open Payments database by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was queried to identify industry payments received by these board members between 2014 and 2019. The quantity and magnitude of payments were then evaluated and compared over this study period. All monetary values were adjusted for inflation.A total of 18 orthopaedic journals were included in our analysis. Of the 1,519 editorial board members identified, 711 (46.81%) received some form of industry payment in 2019. The total, average, and median payments over this study period decreased for 6 (31.6%), 7 (36.8%), and 8 of the included journals (44.44%), respectively. Six hundred twenty board members had higher average payments in 2019 than in 2014.Our analysis demonstrated high rates of industry payments among editorial board members of high-impact orthopaedic journals. In addition, we demonstrated marked growth in the total, average, and median magnitude of these payments since the inception of the Open Payments database. Our findings encourage a continued need for transparency in related payments to ensure a fair and unbiased peer-review process, one that is separated from undue industry influence.

Introduction: A solitary subcutaneous mass can be a common clinical finding for patients symptomatic for knee pain, especially when direct pressure by kneeling on the anterior aspect of the knee causes pain. Case Report: We present a 40-year-old who noticed a small fluid filled mass that has become progressively larger and more painful over the past 7 years. The patient’s primary complaint was sharp pain with direct contact. Ultimately, a surgical excision was performed to remove the mass. The histopathological report came back as a glomangioma, a subtype of a glomus tumor. To the best of our knowledge, this is the youngest reported case of a glomangioma of the knee. Conclusion: Glomus tumors found on the digital and subungual regions of patients are a common clinical finding. An extradigital occurrence of a glomangioma, a subtype of a glomus tumor, is rarely found, especially in younger patients. Therefore, a histopathological examination must be done after the removal of any subcutaneous mass.

Evidence demonstrates comparable clinical outcomes across the various surgical approaches to primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, high-quality contemporary data regarding periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) risk between direct anterior approach (DAA) and other (THA) approaches is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated PJI rates reported in the literature between the DAA and other approaches. Five online databases were queried for all studies published from January 1st, 2000 through February 17th, 2021 that reported PJI rates between DAA and other surgical approaches. Studies reporting on primary THAs for osteoarthritis (OA) and that included PJI rates segregated by surgical approach were included. Articles reporting on revision THA, alternative THA etiologies, or minimally invasive techniques were excluded. Mantel–Haenszel (M–H) models were utilized to evaluate the pooled effect of surgical approach on infection rates. Validated risk of bias and methodological quality assessment tools were applied to each study. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of analyses. 28 articles reporting on 653,633 primary THAs were included. No differences were found between DAA cohorts and combined other approaches (OR: 0.95; 95% CI 0.74–1.21; p = 0.67) as well as segregated anterolateral approach cohorts (OR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.64–1.06; p = 0.13). However, DAA patients had a significantly reduced risk of infection compared to those undergoing posterior (OR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.58–0.74; p

BACKGROUND: The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the latest value-based payment program implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. As performance-based bonuses and penalties continue to rise in magnitude, it is essential to evaluate this program’s ability to achieve its core objectives of quality improvement, cost reduction, and competition around clinically meaningful outcomes. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked the following: (1) How do orthopaedic surgeons differ on the MIPS compared with surgeons in other specialties, both in terms of the MIPS scores and bonuses that derive from them? (2) What features of surgeons and practices are associated with receiving penalties based on the MIPS? (3) What features of surgeons and practices are associated with receiving a perfect score of 100 based on the MIPS? METHODS: Scores from the 2018 MIPS reporting period were linked to physician demographic and practice-based information using the Medicare Part B Provider Utilization and Payment File, the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System Data (NPPES), and National Physician Compare Database. For all orthopaedic surgeons identified within the Physician Compare Database, there were 15,210 MIPS scores identified, representing a 72% (15,210 of 21,124) participation rate in the 2018 MIPS. Those participating in the MIPS receive a final score (0 to 100, with 100 being a perfect score) based on a weighted calculation of performance metrics across four domains: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and costs. In 2018, orthopaedic surgeons had an overall mean ± SD score of 87 ± 21. From these scores, payment adjustments are determined in the following manner: scores less than 15 received a maximum penalty adjustment of -5% (“penalty”), scores equal to 15 did not receive an adjustment (“neutral”), scores between 15 and 70 received a positive adjustment (“positive”), and scores above 70 (maximum 100) received both a positive adjustment and an additional exceptional performance adjustment with a maximum adjustment of +5% (“bonus”). Adjustments among orthopaedic surgeons were compared across various demographic and practice characteristics. Both the mean MIPS score and the resulting payment adjustments were compared with a group of surgeons in other subspecialties. Finally, multivariable logistic regression models were generated to identify which variables were associated with increased odds of receiving a penalty as well as a perfect score of 100. RESULTS: Compared with surgeons in other specialties, orthopaedic surgeons’ mean MIPS score was 4.8 (95% CI 4.3 to 5.2; p < 0.001) points lower. From this difference, a lower proportion of orthopaedic surgeons received bonuses (-5.0% [95% CI -5.6 to -4.3]; p < 0.001), and a greater proportion received penalties (+0.5% [95% CI 0.2 to 0.8]; p < 0.001) and positive adjustments (+4.6% [95% CI 6.1 to 10.7]; p < 0.001) compared with surgeons in other specialties. After controlling for potentially confounding variables such as gender, years in practice, and practice setting, small (1 to 49 members) group size (adjusted odds ratio 22.2 [95% CI 8.17 to 60.3]; p < 0.001) and higher Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) scores (aOR 2.32 [95% CI 1.35 to 4.01]; p = 0.002) were associated with increased odds of a penalty. Also, after controlling for potential confounding, we found that reporting through an alternative payment model (aOR 28.7 [95% CI 24.0 to 34.3]; p < 0.001) was associated with increased odds of a perfect score, whereas small practice size (1 to 49 members) (aOR 0.35 [95% CI 0.31 to 0.39]; p < 0.001), a high patient volume (greater than 500 Medicare patients) (aOR 0.82 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.95]; p = 0.01), and higher HCC score (aOR 0.79 [95% Cl 0.66 to 0.93]; p = 0.006) were associated with decreased odds of a perfect MIPS score. CONCLUSION: Collectively, orthopaedic surgeons performed well in the second year of the MIPS, with 87% earning bonus payments. Among participating orthopaedic surgeons, individual reporting affiliation, small practice size, and more medically complex patient populations were associated with higher odds of receiving penalties and lower odds of earning a perfect score. Based on these findings, we recommend that individuals and orthopaedic surgeons in small group practices strive to forge partnerships with larger hospital practices with adequate ancillary staff to support quality reporting initiatives. Such partnerships may help relieve surgeons of growing administrative obligations and allow for maintained focus on direct patient care activities. Policymakers should aim to produce a shortened panel of performance measures to ensure more standardized comparison and less time and energy diverted from established clinical workflows. The current MIPS scoring methodology should also be amended with a complexity modifier to ensure fair evaluation of surgeons practicing in the safety net setting, or those treating patients with a high comorbidity burden. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

The projected increase in utilization rates of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has created an emphasis on novel technologies that can aid providers in maintaining historically positive outcomes. Widespread utilization of robotic assisted THA (RA-THA) is contingent upon achieving favorable outcomes compared to its traditional manual counterpart (mTHA). Therefore, the purpose of our systematic review was to compare RA-THA and mTHA in terms of the following: (1) functional outcomes and (2) complication rates. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for articles published October 1994 and May 2021 comparing functional outcomes and complication rates between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. When three or more studies evaluated certain PROMs and complications, a pooled analysis utilizing Mantel–Haenszel (M–H) models was conducted utilizing data from final follow-up. Our final analysis included 18 studies which reported on a total of 2811 patients [RA-THA: n = 1194 (42.48%); mTHA: n = 1617 (57.52%)]. No significant differences were demonstrated for a majority of pooled analyses and when segregating by robotic system. Only WOMAC scores were significantly lower among RA-THA patients (p = 0.0006). For outcomes without sufficient data for a pooled analysis, there were no significant differences reported among included studies. The growing utilization of RA-THA motivates comparisons to its manual counterpart. Collectively, we found comparable functional outcomes and complication profiles between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. More randomized controlled trials of higher quality and larger sample sizes are necessary to further strengthen these findings.

The accuracy of preoperative patient-reported weight was never evaluated in patients undergoing lower extremity procedures. The purpose of this study was to: (1) compare the disparity between patient-reported and measured weights in patients undergoing lower extremity total joint arthroplasty (LE-TJA) and arthroscopy; and (2) investigate the association between patient-specific factors (patient age, BMI, zip code, and psychiatric comorbidities) and the accuracy of patient-reported weight. Preoperative self-reported weights were retrospectively compared to measured weights in 400 LE-TJA and 85 control arthroscopy patients. The difference between reported and measured weights was calculated. Additionally, the percent of accurate reporting within 0.5, 1, and 5 kg ranges of the measured weight was calculated. Outcomes were compared between surgical modalities as well as between patient-specific factors. There was low disparity (p = 0.838) between patient-reported and measured weights among LE-TJA (mean difference 0.18 ± 3.63 kg; p = 0.446) and that of arthroscopy (0.27 ± 4.08 kg; p = 0.129) patients. Additionally, LE-TJA patients were equally likely to report weights accurately within 0.5 kg of the measured weight (74% vs. 71.76%; p = 0.908). LE-TJA and arthroscopy patients had similar reporting accuracy within 1 and 5 kg of the measured weights (p > 0.05). Preoperative patient-reported weights demonstrated acceptable accuracy in both LE-TJA and lower extremity arthroscopic orthopaedic patient populations making it a potentially reliable parameter of preoperative assessment.

The purpose of this study was to compare (1) operative time, (2) in-hospital pain scores, (3) opioid medication use, (4) length of stay (LOS), (5) discharge disposition at 90-day postoperative, (6) range of motion (ROM), (7) number of physical therapy (PT) visits, (8) emergency department (ED) visits, (9) readmissions, (10) reoperations, (11) complications, and (12) 1-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in propensity matched patient cohorts who underwent robotic arm-assisted (RA) versus manual total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Using a prospectively collected institutional database, patients who underwent RA- and manual TKA were the nearest neighbor propensity score matched 3:1 (255 manual TKA:85 RA-TKA), accounting for various preoperative characteristics. Data were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal–Wallis, Pearson's Chi-squared, and Fisher's exact tests, when appropriate. Postoperative pain scores, opioid use, ED visits, readmissions, and 1-year PROMs were similar between the cohorts. Manual TKA patients achieved higher maximum flexion ROM (120.3 ± 9.9 versus 117.8 ± 10.2, p = 0.043) with no statistical differences in other ROM parameters. Manual TKA had shorter operative time (105 vs.113 minutes, p

We report our experience with a 3D patient-specific instrument (PSI) in an opening-wedge tibial osteotomy for the correction of varus malalignment in a patient with prior anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Previous studies have not reported the use of 3D PSI in patients with prior knee surgeries. A pre-operative CT was used to create a 3D model of the lower extremity using Bodycad Imager. The pre-operative medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), lateral distal femoral ankle, hip-knee-ankle (HKA), and tibial slope were calculated. The Bodycad Osteotomy software package was used to create a simulated osteotomy and correction. The resulting 3D patient-specific surgical guide and plate were used to conduct the high tibial osteotomy. Radiographic measurements and range of motion were evaluated at 6-week follow-up. The arthroscopy and open portions of the procedure were performed in 65 min, with only three fluoroscopy shots taken intraoperatively. At 6-week follow-up, the patient had 125° of flexion and minimal pain. The angular correction of the bone was achieved within 1.9° (planned MPTA 91.9° vs. actual 90°); the HKA angle was achieved with an error of 0.7° (planned 2.4° vs. actual 1.7°); and there was no change in the posterior tibial slope (planned 13.5° vs 13.8° actual). Three-dimensional PSI can be successfully used for the accurate and efficient correction of varus malalignment while accommodating pre-existing hardware, with good short-term clinical outcomes.

Recently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid have announced the decision to review “potentially misvalued” Current Procedural Terminology codes, including those for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). While recent studies have suggested that THA operative times have remained stable in recent years, there is an absence of information regarding how operative times are expected to change in the future. Therefore, the purpose of our analysis was to produce 2- and 10-year prediction models developed from contemporary operative time data. Utilizing the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement patient database, all primary THA procedures performed between January 1st, 2008 and December 31st, 2017 were identified (n = 85,808 THA patients). Autocorrelation fit significance was determined through Box–Ljung lack of fit tests. Time series stationarity was evaluated using augmented Dickey–Fuller tests. After adjusting non-stationary time series for seasonality-dependent changes, 2-year and 10-year operative times were predicted using Autoregressive integrated moving average forecasting models. Our models indicate that operative time will continue to remain stable. Specifically, operative time for ASA Class 2 is projected to fall within 1 min of the previously calculated weighted mean. Additionally, ASA Class 3 projections fall within 3 min of this value. Operative time will remain within 3 min of the most recently reported mean up to the year 2027. Therefore, our findings do not support lowering physician compensation based on this metric. Future analyses should evaluate if operative times adjust over in light of changing patient demographics and alternative reimbursement models.

BACKGROUND Outpatient joint arthroplasty is a potential modality for increased case throughput and is rising in demand. However, we are aware of no study that has compared outcomes between risk-matched outpatient and inpatient procedures within the last 7 years. The aims of this study were to compare matched patient cohorts who underwent outpatient or inpatient joint arthroplasty in terms of 30-day adverse events and readmission rates. METHODS From the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we identified patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and primary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) from 2009 to 2018. Using 10 perioperative variables, patients who underwent an outpatient procedure were 1:4 propensity score-matched with patients who underwent an inpatient procedure. The rates of 30-day adverse events and readmission were compared using the McNemar test. The risk factors for adverse events and readmissions were identified using multivariate regression. RESULTS Of 574,375 patients identified, 21,506 (3.74%) underwent an outpatient procedure. After propensity score matching, an outpatient joint arthroplasty was associated with a lower rate of adverse events (3.18% compared with 7.45%; p < 0.001). When assessed individually, outpatient TKA (3.15% compared with 8.11%; p < 0.001), THA (4.94% compared with 10.05%; p < 0.001), and UKA (1.78% compared with 3.39%; p < 0.001) were all associated with fewer adverse events overall and there was no difference in the rate of 30-day readmission, when compared with inpatient analogs. Outpatient joint arthroplasty was an independent factor for lower adverse events (odds ratio [OR], 0.407 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.369 to 0.449]; p < 0.001), with no increase in the risk of readmission (OR, 1.004 [95% CI, 0.878 to 1.148]; p = 0.951). CONCLUSIONS Contemporary outpatient joint arthroplasty demonstrated lower rates of adverse events with no increased rate of 30-day readmission when compared with risk-matched inpatient counterparts. Although multiple factors should guide the decision for the site of care, outpatient arthroplasty may be a safe alternative to inpatient arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

BACKGROUND: As the landscape of medical education evolves with emerging technologies and the COVID-19 pandemic, e-learning platforms continue to gain popularity. Orthopaedic podcasts, a burgeoning e-learning platform, continue to gain traction; however, there is a paucity of information regarding their coverage of topics and their distribution over time. Therefore, our analysis sought to (1) characterize podcast content related to orthopaedic surgery, and (2) evaluate the changes in the prevalence of orthopaedic podcasts over the past 15 years. METHODS: Three common podcasting platforms (Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, and Spotify) were queried using the key terms "orthopaedic," "orthopedic," and "ortho" in order to identify a list of podcasts that are related to orthopaedic surgery. For each unique orthopaedic podcast, the title, the show description, the number of episodes, the date of the first episode, the date of the most recent episode, and episode frequency were collected. Podcasts were then classified based on a predetermined list of podcast domains. The number of existing active (released within the last 3 months) orthopaedic podcasts was then trended on a monthly basis from 2011 to 2020. RESULTS: Ninety-four unique podcasts met inclusion criteria, 62 of which remained active as of October 25, 2020. The most common podcast domains were "general" (38 [40.4%]) and "clinical knowledge" (20 [21.3%]). Among the assessed podcasts, 90 (95.7%) utilized an exclusively audio format. The majority of podcasts were based in the United States (89.4%), included introductory music (72.3%), and included interviews (63.8%). Most podcast hosts were practicing orthopaedic surgeons (52.1%). Between January 2016 and October 2020, the number of active orthopaedic surgery podcasts grew more than twelvefold (1,240%) at an average rate of roughly 1 new podcast each month (average, 1.0 podcast; standard deviation, 1.8). DISCUSSION: The past decade has seen sizable growth in the number of readily available podcasts related to orthopaedic surgery. Additional research is required to independently assess the quality of these resources and their implications for remote trainee education.

Consensus has not been reached regarding ideal outcome measures for total hip arthroplasty (THA) clinical evaluation and research. The goal of this review was to analyze the trends in outcome metrics within the THA literature and to discuss the potential impact of instrument heterogeneity on clinical practice. A PubMed search of all manuscripts related to THA from January 2005 to December 2019 was performed. Statistical and linear regression analyses were performed for individual outcome metrics as a proportion of total THA publications over time. There was a statistically significant increase in studies utilizing outcomes metrics between 2005 and 2019 (15.1–29.5%; P

Background: Standard preoperative protocols in total joint arthroplasty utilise the international normalised ratio (INR) to determine patient coagulation profiles. However, the relevance of preoperative INR values in joint arthroplasty remains controversial. Therefore, we examined (1) the relationship between preoperative INR values and various outcome measures, including, but not limited to: surgical site complications, medical complications, bleeding, number of readmissions, and mortality. Additionally, we sought to determine (2) specific INR values associated with these complications and (3) cutoff INR levels which correlated with specific outcomes. We additionally applied these analyses to (4) examine the relationship between INR and length-of-stay (LOS). Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (ACS-NSQIP) was queried for rTHA procedures performed between 2006 and 2017. INR ranges were used to stratify cohorts: ⩽1.0, 1.0–⩽1.25, 1.25–⩽1.5, >1.5. INR values were determined using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves for each outcome of interest. Optimal cutoff INR values for each outcome were then obtained using univariate/multivariate models. 2012 patients who underwent rTHA met inclusion criteria. Results: Patients with progressively higher INR values had a significantly different risk of mortality within 30 days ( p = 0.005), bleeding requiring transfusion ( p < 0.001), sepsis ( p = 0.002), stroke ( p < 0.001), failure to wean from ventilator within 48 hours ( p = 0.001), readmission ( p = 0.01), and hospital length of stay ( p < 0.001). Similar results were obtained when utilising optimal INR cutoff values. When correcting for other factors, the following poor outcomes were significantly associated with the respective INR cutoff values (Estimate, 95% CI, p-value): LOS >4 days (1.67, 1.34–2.08, p < 0.001), bleeding requiring transfusion (1.65, 1.30–2.09, p < 0.001), sepsis (2.15, 1.11–4.17, p = 0.022), and any infection (1.82, 1.01–3.29, p = 0.044). Conclusions: Our analysis illustrates a direct relationship between specific preoperative INR levels and poor outcomes following rTHA, including increased LOS, transfusion requirements and infection. Therefore, current INR guideline targets may need to be re-examined when optimising patients for revision arthroplasty.

The aims of this study were to investigate (1) in-hospital mortality rates following septic revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA); (2) compare septic rTKA mortality rates between differing knee revision volume (KRV) hospitals; and (3) identify independent risk factors associated with in-hospital mortality after septic rTKA (up to 2-year follow-up). The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases of New York and Florida were used to identify septic rTKA, and control groups of aseptic rTKA and primary TKA between 2007 and 2012 via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. Mortality was compared between septic rTKA and aseptic rTKA/primary TKA control groups. Hospital KRV was stratified, and independent risk factors of in-hospital mortality were identified and analyzed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses. In this study, 3,531 septic rTKA patients were identified; 105 (3%) patients suffered in-hospital mortality, compared with the control aseptic rTKA (n = 178; 1.7%; p 81 years and higher comorbidity burden were found to contribute to increased risk of 2-year postoperative mortality after septic rTKA. This association could not be established for hospital KRV.

Background: Although the negative effects of smoking have been documented for other types of arthroscopic procedures, there is limited information regarding its influence on hip arthroscopy outcomes. Purpose: To examine the effect of smoking on the following outcomes after hip arthroscopy: patient-reported outcomes (PROs), the degree of improvement in PROs relative to baseline, complication rates, and rates of revision arthroscopy and/or conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA). Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies published between January 1, 1985, and January 14, 2020, comparing the outcomes of hip arthroscopy between smokers and nonsmokers. Case reports, basic science studies, and studies investigating pediatric patients or lacking a description of outcomes were excluded. Included outcome tools were the modified Harris Hip Score, the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction, and the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)–Sports Specific and HOS–Activities of Daily Living. Preoperative characteristics and operative indications were also recorded. Results: Postoperative combined means (± SD) were better in nonsmokers versus smokers for the modified Harris Hip Score (75.67 ± 20.88 vs 82.32 ± 15.5; P = .001), the VAS pain (3.13 ± 2.79 vs 2.13 ± 2.21; P < .001), and the HOS–Sports Specific (62.54 ± 25.38 vs 71.7 ± 23.3; P < .001). There was no difference between groups in VAS satisfaction ( P = .23) or HOS–Activities of Daily Living ( P = .13). The extent of PRO score improvement relative to baseline values was similar in smokers and nonsmokers in all PRO measures ( P > .05 for all). Smokers demonstrated higher rates of postoperative thromboembolic ( P = .0177) and infectious ( P = .006) complications. There was no difference between rates of revision arthroscopy ( P = .47) and THA conversion ( P = .31). Conclusion: Smoking adversely affects certain postoperative PROs and is associated with higher postoperative complication rates. Further studies are required investigating the degree of PRO improvement and long-term arthroscopy revision and THA conversion rates.

Background Physician rating websites have become an increasingly popular medium for patients to give feedback and to obtain information about physicians. Each physician rating website uses different criteria to evaluate physicians, with the option for patients to provide written reviews. Our goal is to identify factors that patients value when seeking an orthopedic surgeon. Methods The study design was observational. We analyzed 7 common physician rating websites ( RateMDs.com , HealthGrades.com , Vitals.com , WebMD.com , CareDash.com , Wellness.com , and ZocDoc.com ) to evaluate orthopedic surgeon ratings and examine the variables that influence these ratings. Numeric ratings were standardized on a scale from 0-100 (higher number = positive rating). Multilevel mixed-effect Poisson regression models were used where appropriate. Results A total of 11,527 online reviews of orthopedic surgeons in a single metropolitan area were evaluated in April 2019. The average overall rating was positive at 83.66 (±12.33) on our scale. The majority of surgeons amassed ≤20 reviews on each website. Higher ratings were correlated with staff friendliness (P = .010), punctuality (P = .009), and knowledge/expertise (P = .031). Analysis of written reviews showed that resolution of original patient complaints was associated with a high-scoring review. Conclusion This study may impact the ability of orthopedic surgeons to improve patient satisfaction and experience. The online image of orthopedic surgeons is positive in general, with weight placed on timeliness, knowledge, and staff friendliness. Further study is needed to examine whether differences exist in patient-centric domains reviewing orthopedic subspecialties. Future multiple geographic area studies will help elucidate any regional variation in patient-recorded data, as well as the role of any participation bias.

Despite high rates of transfusion reported among hip fracture patients in the perioperative period, the relationship between perioperative transfusions and VTE has not been thoroughly explored. Therefore, we used a national database to evaluate how perioperative transfusions among patients undergoing surgical management of hip fractures impacted 1) deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and 2) pulmonary embolism (PE) risk.The Targeted Hip Fracture Database of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) was queried for patients undergoing surgical management of hip fractures from 2016 to 2019. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted using various patient-specific variables to identify risk factors for DVT and PE. A nearest-neighbor propensity score matched (PSM) comparison between patients receiving and not receiving perioperative blood transfusions (1:1) was additionally conducted.Prior to our PSM, preoperative transfusions were not associated with DVT incidence (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 0.80-2.50;Our findings emphasize the importance of perioperative blood management strategies among patients undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture. Specifically, orthopaedic surgeons should aim to optimize hip fracture patients prior to surgical intervention as well as intra-operatively to reduce transfusion incidence.

BACKGROUND: Acute fingertip injuries are common. Providers in rural and underserved areas often transfer these patients due to lack of comfort and skill with treating these injuries. Current learners prefer short and high‐density educational material. It is unknown if basic hand procedures can be taught using ultrashort training videos. This study investigates whether fingertip repair can be taught using a 60‐second educational video viewed immediately prior to performing the procedure. METHODS: A standardized cadaveric fingertip injury model was developed. Twenty‐three emergency medicine residents each having minimal experience with fingertip injury repair were randomized into one of three study arms: A) no video, B) standard‐length (8‐minute) video, and C) ultrashort (60‐second) video. Each subject was presented with an injured cadaveric finger and asked to prepare for and perform the repair within a 30‐minute time frame. The repair was graded on a 10‐point scale following a standard rubric. Time to completion, preparedness, and subjects’ confidence were also assessed. Results were analyzed by one‐way ANOVA and Kruskal‐Wallis tests. RESULTS: Mean repair scores for the standard‐length video group (9.5 ± 0.3) and the ultrashort video group (9.2 ± 0.3) were significantly higher than those of the no video group (4.0 ± 0.3, p

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is an alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to determine implant survivorship, analyze patient-reported outcomes measures and to determine patient satisfaction for patients who underwent metal-on-metal hip resurfacing at a large US academic institution by a single surgeon with a minimum of 10-year follow-up.Patients who underwent hip resurfacing from September 2006 through November 2009 were included. Patient demographics and variables were collected from a prospectively maintained institutional database and patients completed an additional questionnaire with patient-reported outcomes measures.A total of 350 patients (389 hips) out of 371 (433 hips) with a minimum 10-year follow-up were successfully contacted (94.3% follow-up). Mean age was 53 years, 258 were male (73%). 377 out of 389 hips (96.9%) did not require additional surgery. Gender was significantly related to implant survivorship (males 99.0%, females 90.9%; P.001). 330 patients (369 hips, 94.8%) were satisfied with their surgery. Males had higher proportion of satisfaction scores (P = .02) and higher modified Harris Hip Score (odds ratio = 2.63 (1.39, 4.98), P = .003). Median modified Harris Hip Score score for non-revised hips was 84.0 [80.0; 86.0] versus those requiring revision, 81.5 [74.0; 83.0], (P = .009).At a minimum 10-year follow-up, hip resurfacing, using an implant with a good track record, demonstrates 99.0% survivorship in male patients with an average age of 52 years. We believe that the continued use of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty in this population is justified by both positive patient reported outcomes and survivorship.

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) after septic failure is associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared with aseptic revisions. The goals of this study were to characterize (1) the in-hospital mortality rate for patients with septic rTHA, (2) the effect of hospital hip revision surgery volume (HRV) on mortality after septic rTHA, and (3) the independent risk factors associated with in-hospital mortality rates after rTHA with 2-year follow-up. The authors analyzed the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases of New York and Florida to identify cases of septic rTHA from 2007 to 2012 with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes. The authors included patients with (1) no history of THA for 2 years before the index admission and (2) 2 years of follow-up. Groups with primary THA and aseptic rTHA were identified as control groups. Logistic regression was used to evaluate independent associations. Of 3057 patients with septic rTHA, 5.2% (n=160) had in-hospital mortality vs 2.9% of those with primary THA (n=3525, P =.0001) and 2.1% of those with aseptic rTHA (n=252, P =.0001). Octogenarian status, medium-risk Elixhauser comorbidity score, and high-risk Elixhauser comorbidity score were independent risk factors for mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.587, 95% CI=1.103-2.282, P =.0128; AOR=2.439, 95% CI=1.680–3.541, P P P =.0127). Receiving care in a low-HRV hospital increased the risk of 2-year postoperative patient mortality. Similarly, older age and a higher comorbidity burden were independently associated with increased 2-year postoperative mortality. [ Orthopedics . 2022;45(1):57–63.]

While presepsin has shown promise as a sepsis biomarker, it has only recently been considered in the field of orthopedic surgery. Therefore, the present review evaluates the role of presepsin in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) as well as its diagnostic and prognostic value in diagnosing PJI.Utilizing 4 online databases, we thoroughly searched the literature for articles evaluating the role of presepsin in TJA as well as its prognostic and diagnostic value for PJI.Studies evaluating perioperative presepsin trends in primary TJA demonstrated that its natural course is similar to C-Reactive Protein (CRP). The area under (AUC) the receiver operating characteristic curves values for serum presepsin ranged from 0.86 to 0.926. These values were higher than the AUCs for CRP in each of their respective studies. However, synovial presepsin demonstrated a lower AUC (0.41). Prognostically, presepsin demonstrated potential in terms of infection monitoring following revision TJA for PJI.Although the data remains limited, presepsin may serve as a potential biomarker to evaluate the natural inflammatory response following TJA as well as to help diagnose PJI. The present review serves to set the foundation for future study into serum presepsin in larger patient cohorts. Further study is needed to evaluate how this biomarker compares to other laboratory values traditionally used for PJI diagnosis.

BACKGROUND The purpose of our study was to investigate the mid-term clinical and functional outcomes of robotic-arm assisted Bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BiKA). METHODS This study reviewed a single-centre prospectively maintained cohort of 50 patients (53 knees) who underwent BiKA (patellofemoral and medial compartment) at 5- and 7-year postoperative follow-up. RESULTS Mean follow-up was 7.1 ± 0.1 years (range, 7.0-7.3). Kaplan-Meier survivorship rates at 5 and 7 years were 96% and 93%, respectively. At 7-year follow-up, patient satisfaction was 76% satisfied, 13% neutral, and 11% not satisfied. Mean KSS-FS was 80.5 ± 15.8 (range, 30-100) with 82% of patients reporting walking more than 10 blocks, 89% reporting walking without support, and 100% able to go up and down stairs with 61% requiring use of a rail. Three patients (four knees) underwent revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS Our study reported excellent survivorship and functional outcomes, and good-excellent satisfaction at mid-term follow-up for robotic-arm assisted BiKA.

Although intra-articular injections (IAIs) serve as the first-line non-surgical management for severe osteoarthritis (OA), recent analyses have suggested they are associated with an increased infection risk following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Therefore, our systematic review and meta-analysis explored the relationship between IAIs and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following THA reported in the current literature.Five online databases were queried for analyses published from January 1st, 2000-May 1st, 2021 reporting on PJI rates between patients undergoing primary THA who did and did not preoperatively receive an IAI. The overall pooled effect of injection status on PJI incidence was determined using Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models. This was similarly conducted for segregated preoperative intervals: 0-3 months, 3-6 months, 6 + months.A total of 11 articles were included in our analysis reporting on 278,782 THAs (IAI: n = 41,138; no IAI: n = 237,644). Patients receiving pre-operative injections had a significantly higher risk of PJI (OR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.07-1.62; p = 0.009). However, this finding was not robust. IAI receipt within 3-months of THA was associated with significantly higher PJI rates (OR: 1.68, 95% CI 1.48-1.90; p 0.001). However, no significant difference was demonstrated in the 3-6 month (OR: 1.19, 95% CI 0.94-1.52; p = 0.16) and 6 + month sub-analyses (OR: 1.20, 95% CI 0.96-1.50; p = 0.11). The results of all sub-analyses remained were robust.Our findings suggest that patients requiring THA should wait at least 3-months following IAI to reduce post-operative infection risk. This information can help inform patients considering OA management options, as well as adult reconstruction surgeons during preoperative optimization.

Although previous studies have evaluated how the proportion of women in orthopaedic surgery has changed over time, these analyses have been limited by small sample sizes, have primarily used data on residents, and have not included information on growth across subspecialties and geographic regions.We used the National Provider Identifier registry to ask: How have the (1) overall, (2) regional, and (3) subspecialty percentages of women among all currently practicing orthopaedic providers changed over time in the United States?The National Provider Identifier Registry of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was queried for all active providers with taxonomy codes pertaining to orthopaedic subspecialties as of April 2020. Women orthopaedic surgeons were identified among all physicians with subspecialty taxonomy codes. As all providers are required to provide a gender when applying for an NPI, all providers with queried taxonomy codes additionally had gender classification. Our final cohort consisted of 31,296 practicing orthopaedic surgeons, of whom 8% (2363 of 31,296) were women. A total of 11,714 (37%) surgeons possessed taxonomy codes corresponding with a specific orthopaedic subspecialty. A univariate linear regression analysis was used to analyze trends in the annual proportions of women who are active orthopaedic surgeons based on NPI enumeration dates. Specifically, annual proportions were defined using cross-sections of the NPI registry on December 31 of each year. Linear regression was similarly used to evaluate changes in the annual proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons across United States Census regions and divisions, as well as orthopaedic subspecialties. The national growth rate was then projected forward to determine the year at which the representation of women orthopaedic surgeons would achieve parity with the proportion of all women physicians (36.3% or 340,018 of 936,254, as determined by the 2019 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile) and the proportion of all women in the United States (50.8% or 166,650,550 of 328,239,523 as determined by 2019 American Community Survey from the United States Census Bureau). Gender parity projections along with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Holt-Winters forecasting algorithm. The proportions of women physicians and women in the United States were assumed to remain fixed at 2019 values of 36.3% and 50.8%, respectively.There was a national increase in the proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons between 2010 and 2019 (r2 = 0.98; p0.001) at a compound annual growth rate of 2%. Specifically, the national proportion of orthopaedic surgeons who were women increased from 6% (1670 of 26,186) to 8% (2350 of 30,647). Assuming constant growth at this rate following 2019, the time to achieve gender parity with the overall medical profession (that is, to achieve 36.3% women in orthopaedic surgery) is projected to be 217 years, or by the year 2236. Likewise, the time to achieve gender parity with the overall US population (which is 50.8% women) is projected to be 326 years, or by the year 2354. During our study period, there were increases in the proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons across US Census regions. The lowest growth was in the West (17%) and the South (19%). Similar growth was demonstrated across census divisions. In each orthopaedic subspecialty, we found increases in the proportion of women surgeons throughout the study period. Adult reconstruction (0%) and spine surgery (1%) had the lowest growth.We calculate that at the current rate of change, it will take more than 200 years for orthopaedic surgery to achieve gender parity with the overall medical profession. Although some regions and subspecialties have grown at comparably higher rates, collectively, there has been minimal growth across all domains.Given this meager growth, we believe that substantive changes must be made across all levels of orthopaedic education and leadership to steepen the current curve. These include mandating that all medical school curricula include dedicated exposure to orthopaedic surgery to increase the number of women coming through the orthopaedic pipeline. Additionally, we believe the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and individual programs should require specific benchmarks for the proportion of orthopaedic faculty and fellowship program directors, as well as for the proportion of incoming trainees, who are women. Furthermore, we believe there should be a national effort led by American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and orthopaedic subspecialty societies to foster the academic development of women in orthopaedic surgery while recruiting more women into leadership positions. Future analyses should evaluate the efficacy of diversity efforts among other surgical specialties that have achieved or made greater strides toward gender parity, as well as how these programs can be implemented into orthopaedic surgery.

BACKGROUND We systematically reviewed the radiological outcomes of studies comparing robotic-assisted (RA-THA) and manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA). METHODS The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were queried from 1994-2021 for articles comparing radiographic outcomes between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. A meta-analysis was conducted whenever sufficient data was present for common outcomes. RESULTS Our analysis included 20 articles reporting on 4140 patients (RA-THA: n = 1228; mTHA: n = 2912). No differences were demonstrated for acetabular inclination or anteversion. However, RA-THA demonstrated higher rates of cup orientation within the Lewinnek and Callanan safe zones, improved femoral stem alignment, and lower global offset difference (GOD) and limb length discrepancy (all p-values

BACKGROUND Although multiple studies have consistently demonstrated that orthopaedic surgeons receive greater transfers of value than other specialties, the industry payments of providers who are involved in the formation of practice guidelines have not been thoroughly explored. Therefore, the purpose of our analysis was to evaluate the industry payments of the authors of the Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). METHODS The publicly available AAOS web portal (OrthoGuidelines.org) was queried for all AUCs that had been released between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019, regarding the management of musculoskeletal pathologies. A cross-sectional analysis of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments database was conducted to determine the number and total value of industry payments to AUC voting committee members during the year of voting for the AUC. Industry payments for each orthopaedic surgeon voting member were compared with payments received by orthopaedic surgeons nationwide who received any payment within the same year. The proportion of orthopaedic surgeon voting members who received any industry payment was compared with the proportion of orthopaedic surgeons nationwide who received payments. RESULTS Our analysis included a total of 18 different AUCs with 216 voting members, 157 of whom were orthopaedic surgeons. Of the orthopaedic surgeon voting members, 105 (67%) received industry payments, a rate roughly comparable with the national average among orthopaedic surgeons (74%). For 7 of 18 AUCs (39%), the median payment per orthopaedic surgeon voting member was above the median among orthopaedic surgeons receiving payments nationwide that year. Qualitatively, orthopaedic surgeon voting members were more likely to receive payments in the form of royalties, licenses, or speaking fees than orthopaedic surgeons nationwide. CONCLUSIONS AUC voting members receive payments at frequencies and magnitudes that are roughly comparable with orthopaedic surgeons nationwide. Whether voting panel members receiving payments at these rates is ideal or is in the best interest of patients is a policy decision for the AAOS and society at large. Our study confirms that payments are common and, thus, continued vigilance is justified.

In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing posterior spinal instrumented fusion (PSIF), we aimed to answer these questions: (1) is there a difference in postoperative urinary retention (UR) rates among patients who had removal of their Foley catheters before vs. after discontinuation of epidural analgesia (EA)? (2) Can the timing of Foley catheter removal be an independent risk factor for postoperative UR requiring recatheterization? (3) Is there an incurred cost related to treating UR?Retrospective cohort.EA has been widely used for postoperative pain control after PSIF for AIS. In these patients, removing the Foley catheter, inserted for intraoperative monitoring of urine output, is indicated in the early postoperative period. However, a controversy exists as to whether it should be removed before or after the EA has been discontinued.A single-institution, longitudinally maintained database was queried to identify 297 patients who met specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patient characteristics and the order and timing of removing the urinary and epidural catheters were collected. Rates of UR were statistically compared in patients who had early vs. late urinary catheter removal. A univariate and multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors. Hospital episode costs were analyzed.Patients who had early (n = 66, 22%) vs. late (n = 231, 78%) urinary catheter removal had a significantly higher incidence of UR requiring recatheterization (15 vs. 4.7%, p = 0.007). Patient with early removal were almost 4 times more likely to develop UR requiring recatheterization [odds ratio (OR) 3.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5-9.7, p = 0.005]. UR incurred additional costs averaging $15,000/patient (p = 0.204).In patients who had PSIF for AIS, removal of a urinary catheter before discontinuation of EA is an independent risk factor for UR, requiring recatheterization and associated with increased cost.III.

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between elevated preoperative international normalized ratio (INR) and (1) mortality, (2) postoperative bleeding, and (3) other postoperative complications in a national cohort of patients who underwent revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for rTKA procedures conducted between 2006 and 2017. Cohorts were based on INR ranges: 1.5. Univariate/multivariate statistics were calculated to analyze associations between INR value and designated covariates. These statistics were additionally applied to optimal cutoff values of INR calculated using a receiver operating characteristics curve. The final cohort consisted of 1,676 patients. Progressively higher INR values were associated with an increased risk of mortality within 30 days (p

It is important to study the incidence and causes of readmissions in order to understand why they occur and how to reduce them. This study looks at a national sample of patients following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to identify incidences, trends, causes, and timing of 30-day readmissions.Patients undergoing primary TKA from 2012 to 2016 in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were identified (n = 197,192). Patients with fractures (n = 177), nonelective surgery (n = 2234), bilateral TKA (n = 5483), and cases with unknown readmission status (n = 1047) were excluded, leaving a total of 188,251 cases. Linear regression analysis was used to determine trends over time.The incidence of overall 30-day readmission following primary TKA from 2012 to 2016 was 3.19% (6014/188,251), with significant decreases in readmission rates during this time (β = -0.001, P.001). The top 5 causes of readmission included superficial surgical site infection (SSI; 9.7%), non-SSI infection (9.5%), cardiovascular complications (CV; 9.3%), gastrointestinal complications (8.8%), and venous thromboembolisms (8.8%). The most common cause of readmission during postoperative week 1 was CV complications (12.2%), week 2 was superficial SSI (11.6%), week 3 was deep SSI (11.4%), and week 4 was deep SSI (12.4%).Overall, 30-day readmissions following TKA were found to significantly decline from 2012 to 2016. The most common causes of overall readmission included superficial SSI, non-SSI infection, CV complications, gastrointestinal complications, and venous thromboembolisms. However, the most common causes of readmission changed from week to week postoperatively. This data may help institutions develop policies to prevent unplanned readmissions following TKA.

Background Clostridium difficile–associated diarrhea (CDAD) is associated with adverse events and financial liability. As institutions continue to adopt CDAD rates as a quality control metric, it is important to identify patients at risk before surgery, including revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). This study was conducted to (1) determine the incidence of CDAD within 30 days of rTKA and (2) identify perioperative risk factors for CDAD following rTKA. Methods The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried to identify 6023 rTKA procedures from 2015-2016. Preoperative and perioperative variables, including patient demographics, lab values, comorbidities, operative time, procedure type, presence of postoperative infections, and rates of CDAD were collected. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used to detect differences between categorical variables, and t-tests were used to compare continuous variables. A stepwise logistic regression model was used to identify the risk factors for CDAD. Results The rate of CDAD within 30 days of rTKA was found to be 0.4% (24/6024). The CDAD rate following aseptic revision was 0.2% (12/4893), while the incidence of CDAD after septic revision was 1.1% (12/1130). Preoperative functional dependence (odds ratio [OR] = 5.14; P = .002), septic revision (OR = 2.77; P = .026), and cancer (OR = 14.26; P = .016) were statistically significant independent risk factors for CDAD after rTKA. Conclusion The incidence of CDAD after rTKA is approximately 0.4% in the United States. Independent risk factors for CDAD include septic revision, preoperative functional dependence, and cancer. Prevention of CDAD in these higher risk patients must be considered before surgery and antibiotic selection for other infections should be managed judiciously.

Acetabular dysplasia, related to developmental dysplasia of the hip, causes the abnormal distribution of hip joint forces. Surgical correction of acetabular dysplasia involves repositioning the acetabulum to achieve improved coverage of the femoral head. However, ideal placement of the acetabular fragment is challenging, and has led to an increased interest in pre-operative planning modalities. In this study, we used the PubMed and EBSCO host databases to systematically review all the modalities for pre-operative planning of acetabular dysplasia proposed in the current literature. We included all case-series, English, full-text manuscripts pertaining to pre-operative planning for congenital acetabular dysplasia. Exclusion criteria included: total hip arthroplasty (THA) planning, patient population mean age >35, and double/single case studies. A total of 12 manuscripts met our criteria for a total of 186 hips. Pre-operative planning modalities described were: Amira (Thermo Fischer Scientific; Waltham, MA, USA) 12.9%, OrthoMap (Stryker Orthopaedics; Mahwah, NJ, USA) 36.5%, Amira + Biomechanical Guidance System 5.9%, Mills et al. method 16.1%, Klaue et al. method 16.1%, Armand et al. method 6.5%, Tsumura et al. method 3.8% and Morrita et al. method 2.2%. As a whole, there was a notable lack of prospective studies demonstrating these modalities’ efficacy, with small sample sizes and lack of commercial availability diminishing their applicability. Future studies are needed to comprehensively compare computer-assisted planning with traditional radiographic assessment of ideal osteotomy orientation.