Early Morbidity but Not Mortality Increases With Surgery Delayed Greater Than 24 Hours in Patients With a Periprosthetic Fracture of the Hip

Fixation or Revision for Periprosthetic Fractures: Epidemiology, New Trends, and Projections in the United States

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic fractures can be devastating complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The management of periprosthetic fractures is complex, spanning expertise in arthroplasty and trauma. The purpose of this study was to examine and project trends in the operative treatment of periprosthetic fractures in the United States.

METHODS

A large, public and private payer database was queried to capture all International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for periprosthetic femoral and tibial fractures. Statistical models were created to assess trends in treatment for periprosthetic fractures and to predict future surgical rates. An alpha value of 0.05 was used to assess significance. A Bonferroni correction was applied where applicable to account for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

In this study, from 2016 to 2021, 121,298 patients underwent surgical treatment for periprosthetic fractures. There was a significant increase in the total number of periprosthetic fractures. The incidence of periprosthetic hip fractures rose by 38% and that for periprosthetic knee fractures rose by 73%. The number of periprosthetic fractures is predicted to rise 212% from 2016 to 2032. There was a relative increase in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) compared with revision arthroplasty for both periprosthetic hip fractures and periprosthetic knee fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Periprosthetic fractures are anticipated to impose a substantial health-care burden in the coming decades. Periprosthetic knee fractures are predominantly treated with ORIF rather than revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), whereas periprosthetic hip fractures are predominantly treated with revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) rather than ORIF. Both periprosthetic knee fractures and periprosthetic hip fractures demonstrated increasing trends in this study. The proportion of periprosthetic hip fractures treated with ORIF relative to revision THA has been increasing.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Does delay to theatre influence morbidity or mortality in femoral periprosthetic fractures?

Aims

Femoral periprosthetic fractures are rising in incidence. Their management is complex and carries a high associated mortality. Unlike native hip fractures, there are no guidelines advising on time to theatre in this group. We aim to determine whether delaying surgical intervention influences morbidity or mortality in femoral periprosthetic fractures.

Methods

We identified all periprosthetic fractures around a hip or knee arthroplasty from our prospectively collated database between 2012 and 2021. Patients were categorized into early or delayed intervention based on time from admission to surgery (early = ≤ 36 hours, delayed > 36 hours). Patient demographics, existing implants, Unified Classification System fracture subtype, acute medical issues on admission, preoperative haemoglobin, blood transfusion requirement, and length of hospital stay were identified for all patients. Complication and mortality rates were compared between groups.

Results

A total of 365 patients were identified: 140 in the early and 225 in the delayed intervention group. Mortality rate was 4.1% at 30 days and 19.2% at one year. There was some indication that those who had surgery within 36 hours had a higher mortality rate, but this did not reach statistical significance at 30 days (p = 0.078) or one year (p = 0.051). Univariate analysis demonstrated that age, preoperative haemoglobin, acute medical issue on admission, and the presence of postoperative complications influenced 30-day and one-year mortality. Using a multivariate model, age and preoperative haemoglobin were independently predictive factors for one-year mortality (odds ratio (OR) 1.071; p < 0.001 and OR 0.980; p = 0.020). There was no association between timing of surgery and postoperative complications. Postoperative complications were more likely with increasing age (OR 1.032; p = 0.001) and revision arthroplasty compared to internal fixation (OR 0.481; p = 0.001).

Conclusion

While early intervention may be preferable to reduce prolonged immobilization, there is no evidence that delaying surgery beyond 36 hours increases mortality or complications in patients with a femoral periprosthetic fracture.

Impact of surgical timing and type of operative procedure on outcomes in periprosthetic hip fractures: an observational study at an NHS trust centre in the UK

PURPOSE

There is a global trend of increased periprosthetic fractures due to the growing number of arthroplasty procedures. The present study assessed the impact of factors such as time to surgery and type of surgery on the outcomes, which have been seldom evaluated for periprosthetic fractures.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted on consecutive 87 patients within an NHS district hospital trust in the UK. Patients who underwent a complete hip replacement prior to the fracture, received fixation therapy, or underwent revision surgery within the specified time were screened. Patients were grouped in two ways: based on time to surgery and based on surgery type. Logistic regression models were performed to assess for statistically significant differences in post-operative complication, 30-day, and 1-year mortality rates between groups, whilst adjusting for age, gender, and ASA grade.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), 29 patients underwent revision arthroplasty, and 17 patients were subjected to both, ORIF and revision arthroplasty. Sixty of the 87 patients were operated on > 48 h of injury. The median hospital stay was significantly lower in the ORIF plus revision arthroplasty group, versus other surgical groups (p < 0.05) whilst it was significantly higher in the group of patients who underwent surgery after 48 h of injury (p < 0.05). Numerically higher mortality was noted in the revision arthroplasty group (31.03%, p > 0.05). The group that was operated after 48 h of injury showed greater mortality but was comparable to the other group (25% vs. 14.81%, p > 0.05). For post-operative complications, none of the variables were significantly predictive (p > 0.05). However, for 30-day mortality, ASA grade (p = 0.04) and intra-operative complications (p = 0.0001) were significantly predictive. Additionally, for 1-year mortality, ASA grade (p = 0.004) was noted to be significantly predictive.

CONCLUSION

Revision and delayed periprosthetic fracture management (> 48 h after injury) group showed a numerically greater mortality risk; however, this finding was not statistically significant. ASA grading at baseline is predictive of mortality for periprosthetic fractures.

Surgery Within 24 Hours Reduces Mortality and General Complication Rates in Patients Who Have Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures at the Hip

BACKGROUND

In patients who have hip fractures, treatment within 24 hours reduces mortality and complication rates. A similar relationship can be assumed for patients who have hip periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFs) owing to the similar baseline characteristics of the patient populations. This monocentric retrospective study aimed to compare the complication and mortality rates in patients who had hip PPF treated within and after 24 hours.

METHODS

In total, 350 consecutive patients who had hip PPF in a maximum-care arthroplasty and trauma center between 2006 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. The cases were divided into 2 groups using a time to surgery (TTS) of 24 hours as the cutoff value. The primary outcome variables were operative and general complications as well as mortalities within 1 year.

RESULTS

Overall, the mean TTS was 1.4 days, and the 1-year mortality was 14.6%. The TTS ≤ 24 hours (n = 166) and TTS > 24 hours (n = 184) groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics and comorbidities. Surgical complications were equally frequent in the 2 groups (16.3 versus 15.2%, P = .883). General complications occurred significantly more often in the late patient care group (11.4 versus 28.3%, P < .001). In addition, the 30-day mortality (0.6 versus 5.5%, P = .012), and 1-year mortality (8.3 versus 20.5%, P = .003) rates significantly increased in patients who had TTS > 24 hours. Cox regression analysis yielded a hazard ratio of 4.385 (P < .001) for the TTS > 24 hours group.

CONCLUSIONS

Prompt treatment is required for patients who have hip PPF to reduce mortality and overall complications.

A comparison of mortality rates following revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic fracture, infection or aseptic loosening

BACKGROUND

Mortality following revision hip surgery for periprosthetic fracture (PPF) is comparable to neck of femur fractures. Our institution provides a regional "PPF Service". The aim of this study was to determine the time to surgery and mortality rate for PPF, compared to revision for infection or aseptic loosening.

METHODS

Revision arthroplasty procedures performed for PPF, infection or aseptic loosening between January 2014 and December 2015 were identified. Comparisons were made between the 3 groups for baseline demographics, admission to higher-level care, length of stay, complications and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 37 PPF, 71 infected and 221 aseptic revisions. PPF had a higher proportion of females (65% vs. 39% in infection and 53% in aseptic; p = 0.031) and grade 3 and 4 ASA patients (p = 0.006). Median time to surgery for PPF was 8 days (95% CI, 6-16). Single-stage procedures were performed in 84% of PPF, 42% of infections and 99% of aseptic revisions (p < 0.001). 19% of PPF revisions required HDU admission, 1% in the aseptic group and none in the infection group. Median length of stay was significantly different (PPF 10; infection 14; aseptic 8 days (p < 0.001). The 1-year mortality rate for PPF was 0%, 2.8% for infection and 0.9% in the aseptic group (p = 0.342).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the PPF group having higher ASA grades and more HDU admissions, our 1-year mortality rate was 0% and not significantly different to infection or aseptic loosening. Our low complication and 1-year mortality rate is encouraging and supports the safety of a regional "Periprosthetic Fracture Service".

Periprosthetic Fractures around Total Hip Replacement-Is There a Rush to Fix?

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic fractures now account for 14.1% of all hip revisions. Surgery is often highly specialised and can involve the revision of implants, fixation of fractures, or a combination of both. Delays to surgery are frequent as specialist equipment and surgeons are often required. UK guidelines are currently moving in favour of early surgery in a similar way to the neck of femur fractures, despite a lack of evidential consensus.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent surgery for periprosthetic fractures around a total hip replacement (THR) at a single unit between 2012 and 2019 was performed. Risk factors for complications, length of stay (LOS), and time to surgery data were collected and analysed using regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 88 patients met the inclusion criteria: 63 (72%) were treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and 25 (28%) underwent revision THR. Baseline characteristics were similar in both the ORIF and revision groups. Revision surgery was more likely to be delayed than ORIF owing to the need for specialist equipment and personnel (median 143 h vs. 120 h, p = 0.04). Median LOS was 17 days if operated within 72 h and 27 days if delayed beyond this (p < 0.0001), but there was no increase in 90-day mortality (p = 0.66), HDU admission (p = 0.33), or perioperative complications (p = 0.27) with delay beyond 72 h.

CONCLUSION

Periprosthetic fractures are complex and require a highly specialised approach. Delaying surgery does not result in increased mortality or complications but does increase length of stay. Further multicentre research into this area is required.

Respiratory Compromise After Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery: Incidence, Subsequent Complications, and Independent Predictors

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Respiratory compromise (RC) is a rare but catastrophic complication of anterior cervical spine surgery (ACSS) commonly due to compressive fluid collections or generalized soft tissue swelling in the cervical spine. Established risk factors include operative duration, size of surgical exposure, myelopathy, among others. The purpose of this current study is to identify the incidence and clinical course of patients who develop RC, and identify independent predictors of RC in patients undergoing ACSS for cervical spondylosis.

METHODS

A large, prospectively-collected registry was used to identify patients undergoing ACSS for spondylosis. Patients with posterior cervical procedures were excluded. Baseline patient characteristics were compared using bivariate analysis, and multivariate analysis was employed to compare postoperative complications and identify independent predictors of RC.

RESULTS

298 of 52,270 patients developed RC (incidence 0.57%). Patients who developed RC had high rates of 30-day mortality (11.7%) and morbidity (75.8%), with unplanned reoperation and pneumonia the most common. The most common reason for reoperations were hematoma evacuation and tracheostomy. Independent patient-specific factors predictive of RC included increasing patient age, male gender, comorbidities such as chronic cardiac and respiratory disease, preoperative myelopathy, prolonged operative duration, and 2-level ACCFs.

CONCLUSION

This is among the largest cohorts of patients to develop RC after ACSS identified to-date and validates a range of independent predictors, many previously only described in case reports. These results are useful for taking preventive measures, identifying high risk patients for preoperative risk stratification, and for surgical co-management discussions with the anesthesiology team.

Protocol-based interdisciplinary co-management for hip fracture care: 3 years of experience at an academic medical center

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary standardized protocols for the care of patients with hip fractures have been shown to improve outcomes. A hip fracture protocol was implemented at our institution to standardize care, focusing on emergency care, pre-operative medical management, operative timing, and geriatrics co-management. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of this protocol.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of adult patients admitted to a single tertiary care institution who underwent operative management of a hip fracture between July 2012 and March 2020. Comparison of patient characteristics, hospitalization characteristics, and outcomes were performed between patients admitted before and after protocol implementation in 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 517 patients treated for hip fracture were identified: 313 before and 204 after protocol implementation. Average age, average Charlson Comorbidity Index, percent female gender, and distribution of hip fracture diagnosis did not vary significantly between groups. There was a significant reduction in time from admission to surgical management, from 37.0 ± 47.7 to 28.5 ± 27.1 h (p = 0.0016), and in the length of hospital stay, from 6.3 ± 6.5 to 5.4 ± 4.0 days (p = 0.0013). The percentage of patients whose surgeries were performed under spinal anesthesia increased from 12.5 to 26.5% (p = 0.016). There was no difference in 90-day readmission rate or mortality at 30 days, 90 days, or 1 year between groups.

CONCLUSION

With the implementation of an interdisciplinary hip fracture protocol, we observed significant and sustained reductions in time to surgery and hospital length of stay, important metrics in hip fracture management, without increased readmission or mortality. This has implications to minimize health care costs and improve outcomes for our aging population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, therapeutic.

Hybrid Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion and Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: An Analysis of Short-Term Complications, Reoperations, and Readmissions

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

Although cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has become a well-established and effective treatment for symptomatic cervical degeneration, many patients with multilevel disease are not good candidates for CDA at all levels. For such patients, hybrid surgery (HS)-a combination of adjacent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and CDA-may be more appropriate. Given the novelty of HS and the relative dearth of studies adequately assessing short-term perioperative complications, this current study sought to assess the short-term morbidity profile of HS, differences in operative duration, length of stay (LOS), and readmission and reoperation rates and reasons relative to a 2-level ACDF cohort.

METHODS

All patients who underwent HS and 2-level ACDF were identified between 2011 and 2018 using a large, prospectively collected registry. Baseline patient characteristics and postoperative complications were compared using bivariate and/or multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 390 patients undergoing HS were identified. Two-level procedures were the most common (74.9%). Patients undergoing HS were more likely to be younger, male, and have fewer comorbidities. There were no differences between HS and 2-level ACDF in rates of any postoperative complication, transfusion, readmissions, and operative duration. However, HS had a decreased LOS (0.5 days), relative to a 2-level ACDF. HS patients had low rates of reoperation (1.28%) with 1 case for hematoma evacuation and another for revision CDA.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents one of the largest cohorts of patients undergoing HS reported to date. Patients undergoing HS are not at increased risk of perioperative complications relative to a 2-level ACDF and may benefit from shorter LOS.

2021 John Charnley Award: A protocol-based strategy when using hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures decreases mortality, length of stay, and complications

AIMS

While interdisciplinary protocols and expedited surgical treatment improve the management of hip fractures in the elderly, the impact of such interventions on patients specifically undergoing arthroplasty for a femoral neck fracture is not clear. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of an interdisciplinary protocol for the management of patients with a femoral neck fracture who are treated with an arthroplasty.

METHODS

In 2017, our institution introduced a standardized interdisciplinary hip fracture protocol. We retrospectively reviewed adult patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty (HA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) for femoral neck fracture between July 2012 and March 2020, and compared patient characteristics and outcomes between those treated before and after the introduction of the protocol.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients were treated before the introduction of the protocol (35 (22.3%) with a THA), and 114 patients were treated after its introduction (37 (32.5%) with a THA). The demographic details and medical comorbidities were similar in the two groups. Patients treated after the introduction of the protocol had a significantly reduced median time between admission and surgery (22.8 hours (interquartile range (IQR) 18.8 to 27.7) compared with 24.8 hours (IQR 18.4 to 43.3) (p = 0.042), and a trend towards a reduced mean time to surgery (24.1 hours (SD 10.7) compared with 46.5 hours (SD 165.0); p = 0.150), indicating reduction in outliers. Patients treated after the introduction of the protocol had a significantly decreased rate of major complications (4.4% vs 17.2%; p = 0.005), decreased median hospital length of stay in hospital (4.0 days vs 4.8 days; p = 0.008), increased rate of discharge home (26.3% vs 14.7%; p = 0.030), and decreased one-year mortality (14.7% vs 26.3%; p = 0.049). The 90-day readmission rate (18.2% vs 21.7%; p = 0.528) and 30-day mortality (3.7% vs 5.1%; p = 0.767) did not significantly differ. Patients who underwent HA were significantly older than those who underwent THA (82.1 years (SD 10.4) vs 71.1 years (SD 9.5); p < 0.001), more medically complex (mean Charlson Comorbidity Index 6.4 (SD 2.6) vs 4.1 (SD 2.2); p < 0.001), and more likely to develop delirium (8.5% vs 0%; p = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

The introduction of an interdisciplinary protocol for the management of elderly patients with a femoral neck fracture was associated with reduced time to surgery, length of stay, complications, and one-year mortality. Such interventions are critical in improving outcomes and reducing costs for an ageing population. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):3-8.

Early Surgery Does Not Improve Outcomes for Patients with Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures-Results from the Registry for Geriatric Trauma of the German Trauma Society

Background and Objectives: Appropriate timing of surgery for periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) in geriatric patients remains unclear. Data from a large international geriatric trauma register were analyzed to examine the outcome of patients with PFF with respect to the timing of surgical stabilization. Materials and Methods: The Registry for Geriatric Trauma of the German Trauma Society (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (DGU)) (ATR-DGU) was analyzed. Patients treated surgically for PFF were included in this analysis. As outcome parameters, in-house mortality rate and mortality at the 120-day follow-up as well as mobility, the EQ5D index score and reoperation rate were analyzed in relation to early (<48 h) or delayed (≥48 h) surgical stabilization. Results: A total of 1178 datasets met the inclusion criteria; 665 fractures were treated with osteosynthesis (56.4%), and 513 fractures were treated by implant change (43.5%). In contrast to the osteosynthesis group, the group with implant changes underwent delayed surgical treatment more often. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of mortality rate (p = 0.310), walking ability (p = 0.239) and EQ5D index after seven days (p = 0.812) revealed no significant differences between early (<48 h) and delayed (≥48 h) surgical stabilization. These items remained insignificant at the follow-up as well. However, the odds of requiring a reoperation within 120 days were significantly higher for delayed surgical treatment (OR: 1.86; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Early surgical treatment did not lead to decreased mortality rates in the acute phase or in the midterm. Except for the rate of reoperation, all other outcome parameters remained unaffected. Nevertheless, for most patients, early surgical treatment should be the goal, so as to achieve early mobilization and avoid secondary nonsurgical complications. If early stabilization is not possible, it can be assumed that orthogeriatric co-management will help protect these patients from further harm.

Increasing severity of anemia is associated with poorer 30-day outcomes for total shoulder arthroplasty

Background

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has increased in utilization over the past several decades. Anemia is a common preoperative condition among patients undergoing TSA and has been associated with poorer outcomes in other surgical procedures. To the best of our knowledge, no study has analyzed the association between anemia severity and TSA outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the effects that increasing severity of anemia may have on the postoperative outcomes in patients receiving primary TSA.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Project database from the years 2015 to 2018. Current Procedure Terminology code 23472 was used to identify all primary TSA procedures recorded during this time frame. Patients with greater than 38% preoperative hematocrit (HCT) were classified as having normal HCT levels. Patients with HCT values between 33% and 38% were classified as having mild anemia. All patients with less than 33% HCT were classified as having moderate/severe anemia. Patient demographic information, preoperative risk factors, and postoperative outcomes were compared among the 3 cohorts. A multivariate logistic regression including demographic factors and comorbidities was performed to determine whether increasing severity of anemia is independently associated with poorer postoperative outcomes.

Results

Of the 15,185 patients included in this study, 11,404 had normal HCT levels, 2962 patients were mildly anemic, and 819 patients had moderate to severe anemia. With increasing severity of anemia, there was an increased average hospital length of stay (1.6 vs. 2.1 vs. 3.0 days, P < .001), rate of readmissions (2.3% vs. 4.8% vs. 7.0%, P < .001), and rate of all reoperations (1.1% vs. 1.8% vs. 3.1%, P < .001). There was a statistically significant increase in both minor (1.9% vs. 2.7% vs. 4.4%, P < .001) and major (1.2% vs. 2.4% vs. 4.3%, P < .001) postoperative complication rates as well. Multivariate analysis identified anemia as an independent predictor of readmissions, reoperations, minor complications, and major complications.

Conclusion

We found increasing severity of anemia to be associated with progressively worse 30-day postoperative outcomes. This is consistent with the outcomes found for increasing severity of anemia in patients receiving other total joint procedures. Using preoperative HCT levels may be a useful tool for predicting the risk of postoperative complications in patients undergoing TSA. This information could be used to further optimize patient selection for primary TSA.

Does early surgery improve outcomes for periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee? A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Previous evidence has established that early surgery is beneficial to improve outcomes for individuals with native hip fractures in the elderly population. Patients who sustain a periprosthetic fracture have been demonstrated to have similar demographics and outcomes as those with native fractures around the hip and knee. We therefore set out to determine if there is a similar difference in perioperative outcomes between early and delayed surgery for periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Literature search outputs were screened for studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The groups of early surgery and delayed surgery were defined by study authors. The primary outcome measure was 30 day mortality. Where there was sufficient study homogeneity, a random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Individual study risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I criteria, with the GRADE criteria used for independent outcome evaluation. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO prior to commencement (Registration number CRD42019149360).

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria was met in 11 studies (n = 3006). Mean time to surgery from admission for reporting studies was 64 h. 59.6% patients underwent early surgery as defined by the study authors. We identified a significantly lower risk of 30 day mortality for those with early surgery versus delayed surgery (RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.05, 0.90; p = 0.04, n = 2022). There were also significantly better outcomes for early versus delayed surgery regarding: medical complications, length of stay, transfusion risk, and reoperation. The quality of evidence for all the individual outcomes was low or very low.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that delaying surgery in those with periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee has a deleterious impact on mortality and other important patient outcomes. There are, however, notable limitations to the existing available literature, with further appropriately designed large-scale studies required to confirm these findings.