The Lawrence D. Dorr Surgical Techniques & Technologies Award: Aseptic Reoperations Within One Year of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Markedly Increase the Risk of Later Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Strikingly High Rates of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Revision Surgery for Periprosthetic Fractures Regardless of Surgery Timing

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic fractures following total hip arthroplasty (THA) often occur in the early postoperative period. Recent data has indicated that early revisions are associated with higher complication rates, particularly periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of timing of periprosthetic fracture surgery on complication rates. We hypothesized that complication rates would be significantly higher in revision surgeries performed within 3 months of the index THA.

METHODS

The Medicare Part A claims database was queried from 2010 to 2017 to identify patients who underwent surgery for a periprosthetic fracture following primary THA. Patients were divided based on time between index and revision surgeries: <1, 1 to 2, 2 to 3, 3 to 6, 6 to 9, 9 to 12, and >12 months. Complication rates were compared between groups using multivariate analyses to adjust for demographics, comorbidities, and types of revision surgery.

RESULTS

Of 492,340 THAs identified, 4,368 (0.9%) had a subsequent periprosthetic fracture requiring surgery: 1,725 (39.4%) at <1 month, 693 (15.9%) at 1 to 2 months, 202 (4.6%) at 2 to 3 months, 250 (5.7%) at 3 to 6 months, 134 (3.1%) at 6 to 9 months, 85 (19.4%) at 9 to12 months, and 1,279 (29.3%) at >12 months. The risk of PJI was 11.0% in the <1 month group, 11.1% at 1 to 2 months, 7.9% at 2 to 3 months, 6.8% at 3 to 6 months, 8.2% at 6 to 9 months, 9.4% at 9 to 12 months, and 8.5% at >12 months (P = .12). Adjusting for confounding factors, risk of PJI following periprosthetic fracture surgery was similar regardless of timing (P > .05). Rates of subsequent dislocation and aseptic loosening were also similar regardless of timing.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of PJI following repeat surgery for a periprosthetic fracture was strikingly high regardless of timing (6.8 to 11.1%), underscoring the high-risk of complications.

What's New in Periprosthetic Femur Fractures?

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic femur fracture (PFF) is one of the most common indications for reoperation following total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS/RESULTS

This article provides a review of a symposium on PFF that was presented at the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons 2023 annual meeting, including an overview of the Vancouver classification and its implications on treatment and subsequent complications, an updated approach to the management of intraoperative fractures, and finally, contemporary strategies for both osteosynthesis as well as revision arthroplasty for PFFs.

CONCLUSION

As the incidence of PPF continues to increase, arthroplasty and trauma surgeons must be prepared to address this challenging complication with a contemporary understanding of the treatment options and their outcomes.

Debulking of the Femoral Stem in a Primary Total Hip Joint Replacement: A Novel Method to Reduce Stress Shielding

In current-generation designs of total primary hip joint replacement, the prostheses are fabricated from alloys. The modulus of elasticity of the alloy is substantially higher than that of the surrounding bone. This discrepancy plays a role in a phenomenon known as stress shielding, in which the bone bears a reduced proportion of the applied load. Stress shielding has been implicated in aseptic loosening of the implant which, in turn, results in reduction in the in vivo life of the implant. Rigid implants shield surrounding bone from mechanical loading, and the reduction in skeletal stress necessary to maintain bone mass and density results in accelerated bone loss, the forerunner to implant loosening. Femoral stems of various geometries and surface modifications, materials and material distributions, and porous structures have been investigated to achieve mechanical properties of stems closer to those of bone to mitigate stress shielding. For improved load transfer from implant to femur, the proposed study investigated a strategic debulking effort to impart controlled flexibility while retaining sufficient strength and endurance properties. Using an iterative design process, debulked configurations based on an internal skeletal truss framework were evaluated using finite element analysis. The implant models analyzed were solid; hollow, with a proximal hollowed stem; FB-2A, with thin, curved trusses extending from the central spine; and FB-3B and FB-3C, with thick, flat trusses extending from the central spine in a balanced-truss and a hemi-truss configuration, respectively. As outlined in the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 7206 standards, implants were offset in natural femur for evaluation of load distribution or potted in testing cylinders for fatigue testing. The commonality across all debulked designs was the minimization of proximal stress shielding compared to conventional solid implants. Stem topography can influence performance, and the truss implants with or without the calcar collar were evaluated. Load sharing was equally effective irrespective of the collar; however, the collar was critical to reducing the stresses in the implant. Whether bonded directly to bone or cemented in the femur, the truss stem was effective at limiting stress shielding. However, a localized increase in maximum principal stress at the proximal lateral junction could adversely affect cement integrity. The controlled accommodation of deformation of the implant wall contributes to the load sharing capability of the truss implant, and for a superior biomechanical performance, the collared stem should be implanted in interference fit. Considering the results of all implant designs, the truss implant model FB-3C was the best model.

Early Periprosthetic Femur Fractures After Primary Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty: High Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Subsequent Reoperation

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic femur fracture (PFF) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a leading cause of early reoperation. The objective of this study was to compare rates of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and reoperation following PFFs occurring early postoperatively to those that occurred late.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 173 consecutive surgically managed PFFs following primary THA. Cases were categorized as "early" if they occurred within 90 days of THA (n = 117) or "late" if they occurred following the initial 90 days (n = 56). Mean age at time of PFF was 68 years (range, 26 to 96) and 60% were women. Mean body mass index was 29 (range, 16 to 52). Mean follow-up was 2 years (range, 0 to 13). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis estimated cumulative incidences of PJI and reoperation.

RESULTS

Early PFFs had higher 2-year cumulative incidence of PJI (11% versus 0%, P < .001) and reoperation (24% versus 13%, P = .110). Following early PFF, 27 patients required reoperation (ie, 13 for PJI, 5 for instability, 2 for re-fracture, 2 for painful hardware, 2 for non-union, 1 for adverse local tissue reaction, 1 for aseptic loosening, and 1 for leg-length discrepancy). Following late PFF, 5 patients required reoperation (ie, 3 for instability, 1 for re-fracture, and 1 for non-union).

CONCLUSIONS

There are greater incidences of PJIs and overall reoperations following early PFFs compared to late PFFs after THA. In addition to focusing efforts on prevention of early PFFs, surgeons should consider antiseptic interventions to mitigate the increased risk of PJI after treatment of early PFF.

Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Four joint arthroplasty registries (JARs) levels exist based on the recorded data type. Level I JARs are national registries that record primary data. Hospital or institutional JARs (Level II-IV) document further data (patient-reported outcomes, demographic, radiographic). A worldwide list of Level II-IV JARs must be created to effectively assess and categorize these data.

METHODS

Our study is a systematic scoping review that followed the PRISMA guidelines and included 648 studies. Based on their publications, the study aimed to map the existing Level II-IV JARs worldwide. The secondary aim was to record their lifetime, publications' number and frequency and recognise differences with national JARs.

RESULTS

One hundred five Level II-IV JARs were identified. Forty-eight hospital-based, 45 institutional, and 12 regional JARs. Fifty JARs were found in America, 39 in Europe, nine in Asia, six in Oceania and one in Africa. They have published 485 cohorts, 91 case-series, 49 case-control, nine cross-sectional studies, eight registry protocols and six randomized trials. Most cohort studies were retrospective. Twenty-three per cent of papers studied patient-reported outcomes, 21.45% surgical complications, 13.73% postoperative clinical and 5.25% radiographic outcomes, and 11.88% were survival analyses. Forty-four JARs have published only one paper. Level I JARs primarily publish implant revision risk annual reports, while Level IV JARs collect comprehensive data to conduct retrospective cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study mapping all Level II-IV JARs worldwide. Most JARs are found in Europe and America, reporting on retrospective cohorts, but only a few report on studies systematically.

Managing early complications in total hip arthroplasty: the safety of immediate revision

PURPOSE

Immediate revision refers to a reoperation that involves resetting, draping, and exchanging the implant, after wound closure in total hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of immediate revision after total hip arthroplasty on subsequent infection and complication rates.

METHODS

A total of 14,076 primary total hip arthroplasties performed between 2010 and 2020 were identified in our institutional database, of which 42 underwent immediate revision. Infection rates were determined 2 years after the index arthroplasty. The cause and type of revision, duration of primary and revision surgeries, National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance score, implant type, changes in implants, complications, and preoperative and intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis were all determined.

RESULTS

No infections were observed within 2 years after the index arthroplasty. Leg length discrepancy (88%, n = 37) and dislocation (7.1%, n = 3) were the main causes of immediate revision. In most cases of discrepancy, the limb was clinically and radiologically longer before the immediate revision. The mean operative time was 48 ± 14 min for the primary procedure and 23.6 ± 9 min for the revision. The time between the first incision and last skin closure ranged from 1 to 3 h. None of the patients were extubated between the two procedures. Two patients had a National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance score of 2, 13 had a score of 1, and 27 had a score of 0.

CONCLUSION

Immediate revision is safe for correcting clinical and radiological abnormalities, and may not be associated with increased complication or infection rates.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study; level of evidence, 3.

Causes of Early Hip Revision Vary by Age and Gender: Analysis of Data From a Statewide Quality Registry

BACKGROUND

While total hip arthroplasty (THA) is extremely successful, early failures do occur. The purpose of this study was to determine the cause of revision in specific patient demographic groups at 3 time points to potentially help decrease the revision risk.

METHODS

Data for cases performed between 2012 and 2018 from a statewide, quality improvement arthroplasty registry were used. The database included 79,205 THA cases and 1,433 revisions with identified etiology (1,584 in total). All revisions performed at <5 years from the primary THA were reviewed. Six groups, men/women, <65, 65-75, and >75 years, were compared at revision time points <6 months, <1 year, and <5 years.

RESULTS

There were obvious and significant differences between subgroups based on demographics and time points (P < .0001). Seven hundred and fifty-six (53%) of all revisions occurred within 6 months. The most common etiologies within 6 months (756 revisions) were fracture (316, 41.8%), dislocation/instability (194, 25.7%), and infection (98, 12.9%). At this early time point, the most common revision cause was fracture for all age/gender-stratified groups, ranging from 27.6% in young men to 60% in older women. Joint instability became the leading cause for revision after 1 year in all groups.

CONCLUSION

This quality improvement project demonstrated clinically meaningful differences in the reason for THA revision between gender, age, and time from surgery. Strategies based on these data should be employed by surgeons to minimize the factors that lead to revision.

Early aseptic reoperation after shoulder arthroplasty increases risk of subsequent prosthetic joint infection

Background

Despite the success of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), the clinical course of some patients necessitates operative intervention in the acute postoperative period. In this study, we evaluate the risk of subsequent prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who undergo an aseptic reoperation within 90 days of primary shoulder arthroplasty.

Method

A retrospective review of patients with primary TSA and RSA was performed using a commercially available national database (PearlDiver Inc., Fort Wayne, IN, USA). Queries were performed with use of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision and Current Procedural Technology codes. Patients were divided into cohorts based on undergoing aseptic reoperation, reoperation for PJI, or no reoperations within 90 days of index procedure. Primary outcome was subsequent PJI within 1 year of index procedure. Observed PJI rates were compared using chi-square analysis. Risk factors for PJI were compared using logistic regression.

Results

From 2010 to 2018, a total of 96,648 patients underwent primary shoulder arthroplasty: 46,810 underwent TSA and 49,838 underwent RSA. The rate of aseptic reoperation within 90 days was 0.72% and 1.5% in the TSA and RSA cohorts, respectively. At 1 year postoperatively, patients who underwent an aseptic reoperation within 90 days had an elevated risk of subsequent PJI compared with the overall rate of PJI in the TSA (3.54% vs. 0.75%; P < .001) and RSA (3.08% vs. 0.73%; P < .001) cohorts. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, aseptic reoperation within 90 days was identified as a significant risk factor for subsequent PJI in the TSA cohort (odds ratio, 14.19; P < .001) and RSA cohort (odds ratio, 8.38; P < .001). The most common indication for aseptic reoperation was postoperative prosthetic joint instability in both the TSA (31%) and RSA (49%) cohorts.

Conclusion

Aseptic reoperation within 90 days of primary TSA or primary RSA was associated with a notably increased risk of subsequent PJI.