Why are patients still in hospital after fast-track, unilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Day-case success or why still in hospital after total hip, total knee, and medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasties?

Aims

Day-case success rates after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (mUKA) may vary, and detailed data are needed on causes of not being discharged. The aim of this study was to analyze the association between surgical procedure type and successful day-case surgery, and to analyze causes of not being discharged on the day of surgery when eligible and scheduled for day-case THA, TKA, and mUKA.

Methods

A multicentre, prospective consecutive cohort study was carried out from September 2022 to August 2023. Patients were screened for day-case eligibility using well defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and discharged when fulfilling predetermined discharge criteria. Day-case eligible patients were scheduled for surgery with intended start of surgery before 1.00 pm.

Results

Of 6,142 primary hip and knee arthroplasties, eligibility rates for day-case surgery were 34% for THA (95% CI 32% to 36%), 34% for TKA (95% CI 32% to 36%), and 52% for mUKA (95% CI 49% to 55%). Surgery before 1.00 pm was achieved in 85% of eligible patients. The day-case success rate among patients with surgery before 1.00 pm was 59% (95% CI 55% to 62%) for THA, 61% (95% CI 57% to 65%) for TKA, and 72% (95% CI 68% to 76%) for mUKA. Overall day-case success rates (eligible and non-eligible) were 19% (95% CI 17% to 20%) for THA, 20% (95% CI 18% to 21%) for TKA, and 42% (95% CI 39% to 45%) for mUKA. Adjusted analysis confirmed higher day-case success in eligible mUKA patients (odds ratio 1.9 (1.6 to 2.3)) compared to TKA and THA patients. Primary causes for day-case failure were mobilization issues (9% to 12% between procedures), prolonged spinal anaesthesia (4% to 9%), and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (4% to 14%).

Conclusion

THA and TKA patients showed comparable eligibility (34%) with similar day-case success rates (59 to 61%), whereas mUKA patients demonstrated higher eligibility (52%) and day-case success (72%). Mobilization issues, prolonged spinal anaesthesia, and PONV were the most frequent causes for not being discharged.

The Effects of Perineural Dexamethasone on Rebound Pain After Nerve Block in Patients With Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

A single nerve block provides excellent analgesia in a short time, but rebound pain after the nerve block dissipates has attracted researchers' attention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of perineural dexamethasone on rebound pain after sciatic nerve block and femoral nerve block in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

METHODS

In a double-blinded fashion, we recruited 72 patients undergoing UKA, each of whom received sciatic and femoral nerve block. Patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups (n=36): X (ropivacaine only) and D (ropivacaine combined with dexamethasone). The primary outcome was the incidence of rebound pain. The secondary outcomes were rebound pain score, the duration of rebound pain, the duration of nerve block, pain score, sufentanil consumption and rescue analgesic, patient-controlled intravenous analgesia, distance walked, sleep quality score, C-reactive protein levels, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Compared with group X, the incidence of rebound pain in group D was higher, the rebound pain score was higher and the duration of the nerve block was prolonged ( P <0.05). At 12, 16, and 20 hours postoperatively, the pain scores at rest in group D were lower. At 32 and 36 hours postoperatively, the pain scores at rest in group D were higher ( P <0.05). Furthermore, patients in group D had lower levels of C-reactive protein after surgery ( P <0.05).

DISCUSSION

The addition of dexmedetomidine to ropivacaine for UKA effectively prolonged the duration of nerve block and decreased C-reactive protein levels, but increased the incidence of rebound pain and rebound pain score, and had no beneficial effects on the postoperative analgesia.

Acute postoperative pain and catastrophizing in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective, observational, single-center, cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Pain catastrophizing is associated with acute pain after total knee arthroplasty. However, the association between pain catastrophizing and acute pain after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains unclear.

METHODS

We investigated the incidence of predicted high-pain and low-pain responders, based on a preoperative Pain Catastrophizing Scale score >20 or ≤20, respectively, and the acute postoperative pain course in both groups. Patients undergoing UKA were consecutively included in this prospective observational cohort study. Pain at rest and during walking (5 m walk test) was evaluated preoperatively, at 24 hours postoperatively, and on days 2-7 using a pain diary.

RESULTS

125 patients were included, with 101 completing the pain diary. The incidence of predicted high-pain responders was 31% (95% CI 23% to 40%). The incidence of moderate to severe pain during walking at 24 hours postoperatively was 69% (95% CI 52% to 83%) in predicted high-pain responders and 66% (95% CI 55% to 76%) in predicted low-pain responders; OR 1.3 (95% CI 0.5 to 3.1). The incidence of moderate to severe pain at rest 24 hours postoperatively was 49% (95% CI 32% to 65%) in predicted high-pain responders and 28% (95% CI 19% to 39%) in predicted low-pain responders; OR 2.6 (95% CI 1.1 to 6.1; p=0.03). Pain catastrophizing was not associated with increased cumulated pain during walking on days 2-7.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of predicted high-pain responders in UKA was slightly lower than reported in total knee arthroplasty. Additionally, preoperative pain catastrophizing was not associated with acute postoperative pain during walking.

Ambulatory total hip and knee arthroplasty: a literature review and perioperative considerations

PURPOSE

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA), particularly for the hip and knee, is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures. The advancement/evolution of surgical and anesthesia techniques have allowed TJA to be performed on an ambulatory/same-day discharge basis. In this Continuing Professional Development module, we synthesize the perioperative evidence that may aid the development of successful ambulatory TJA pathways.

SOURCE

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for ambulatory or fast-track TJA articles. In the absence of direct evidence for the ambulatory setting, we extrapolated the evidence from the in-patient TJA literature.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Patient selection encompassing patient, medical, and social factors is fundamental for successful same-day discharge of patients following TJA. Evidence for the type of intraoperative anesthesia favours neuraxial technique for achieving same day discharge criteria and reduced perioperative complications. Availability of short-acting local anesthetic for neuraxial anesthesia would affect the anesthetic choice. Nonetheless, modern general anesthesia with multimodal analgesia and antithrombotics in a well selected population can be considered. Regional analgesia forms an integral part of the multimodal analgesia regime to reduce opioid consumption and facilitate same-day hospital discharge, reducing hospital readmission. For ambulatory total knee arthroplasty, a combination of adductor canal block with local anesthetic periarticular infiltration provided is a suitable regional analgesic regimen.

CONCLUSION

Anesthesia for TJA has evolved as such that same-day discharge will become the norm for selected patients. It is essential to establish pathways for early discharge to prevent adverse effects and readmission in this population. As more data are generated from an increased volume of ambulatory TJA, more robust evidence will emerge for the ideal anesthetic components to optimize outcomes.

The safety and efficacy of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in outpatient surgical centers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an effective treatment method for knee osteoarthritis. With the development and implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery, UKA is now increasingly performed in outpatient surgical centers. However, there is ongoing debate regarding the safety and effectiveness of performing UKA in outpatient settings.

METHODS

The search was performed to retrieve randomized controlled trials and cohort studies on outpatient UKA from PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, and WanFangData databases. The search was conducted from the inception of the databases until August 31, 2023. After independent screening, data extraction, and risk of bias evaluation by two researchers, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies involving 18,411 patients were included. The results showed that the postoperative transfusion rate in the outpatient group was lower than that in the inpatient group [OR = 0.36, 95%CI (0.24, 0.54), p < 0.00001], and the difference was statistically significant. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of readmission rate, reoperation rate, surgical site infection, and periprosthetic fracture. The differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the traditional inpatient route, the blood transfusion rate for single-condyle replacement in the outpatient operation center is lower, and there is no significant difference in readmission rate, reoperation rate, surgical site infection, and periprosthesis fracture. The outpatient approach to UKA is safe, feasible, and highly satisfactory for patients. However, the results have certain limitations, and a rigorous preoperative complication risk assessment can minimize the risk of UKA in outpatient surgery centers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO number CRD42023405373.

Spinal anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia (SAGA) on recovery after hip and knee arthroplasty: A study protocol for three randomized, single-blinded, multi-centre, clinical trials

Mobilisation difficulties, due to muscle weakness, and urinary retention are common reasons for prolonged admission following hip and knee arthroplasty procedures. Whether spinal anaesthesia is detrimental to early mobilisation is controversial. Previous studies have reported differences in post-operative recovery between spinal anaesthesia and general anaesthesia; however, up-to-date comparisons in fast-track setups are needed. Our randomized, single-blinded, multi-centre, clinical trials aim to compare the post-operative recovery after total hip (THA), total knee (TKA), and unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA) respectively when using either spinal anaesthesia (SA) or general anaesthesia (GA) in a fast-track setup. Included patients (74 THA, 74 TKA, and 74 UKA patients) are randomized (1:1) to receive either SA (2 mL 0.5% Bupivacaine) or GA (Induction: Propofol 1.0-2.0 mg/kg iv with Remifentanil 3-5 mcg/kg iv. Infusion: Propofol 3-5 mg/kg/h and Remifentanil 0.5 mcg/kg/min iv). Patients undergo standard primary unilateral hip and knee arthroplasty procedures in an optimized fast-track setup with intraoperative local infiltrative analgesia in TKA and UKA, post-operative multimodal opioid sparing analgesia, immediate mobilisation with full weightbearing, no drains and in-hospital only thromboprophylaxis. Data will be collected on the day of surgery and until patients are discharged. The primary outcome is the ability to be safely mobilised during a 5-m walking test within 6 h of surgery. Secondary outcomes include fulfilment of discharge criteria, post-operative pain, dizziness, and nausea as well as patient reported recovery and opioid related side effects. Data will also be gathered on all hospital contacts within 30-days of surgery. This study will offer insights into advantages and disadvantages of anaesthetic methods used in fast-track arthroplasty surgery.

Successful same-day discharge in 88% of patients after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of day-case unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) by assessment of successful same-day discharge (SDD), readmission, complication and reoperation rates in the recent literature.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched to identify all eligible studies reporting outcomes of day-case UKA. Studies with intended same-day home discharge after UKA were included. A meta-analysis of proportions, using a random-effects model, was performed to estimate overall rates of successful SDD and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies including selected patients (i.e., patients had to meet certain patient-specific criteria to be eligible for day-case UKA) and unselected patients (i.e., no additional criteria for day-case UKA), as well as for clinical and registry-based studies. Additional outcomes included reasons for the failure of SDD and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies and 9694 patients were included with a mean age of 66 ± 9 years and mean follow-up of 59 days (mean range 30-270 days). Based on 24 studies (2733 patients), the overall successful SDD rate was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80-92). These rates were 91% (95% CI 84-95) across studies with selected patients and 76% (95% CI 55-89) across studies with unselected patients. Overall readmission, complication and reoperation rates were 3% (95% CI 1.9-4.4), 4% (95% CI 2.8-5.2) and 1% (95% CI 0.8-1.3), respectively. Inability to mobilize, nausea and uncontrolled pain were frequently reported reasons for failed SDD. The overall patient satisfaction rate was 94%.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review with meta-analysis found an overall successful SDD rate of 88% after UKA in a heterogeneous cohort of selected and unselected patients. Readmission, complication and reoperation rates suggest UKA can be performed safely and effectively as a same-day discharge procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of level III and IV studies.

[Research progress on analgesic effect of adductor canal block after knee arthroplasty]

Objective

To summarize the research progress of the analgesic effect of adductor canal block (ACB) applied to knee arthroplasty, in order to find the ACB mode that can obtain better effectiveness.

Methods

The research progress of the analgesic effect of ACB after knee arthroplasty was reviewed by widely consulting the related literature on ACB at home and abroad in recent years.

Results

In recent years, multimodal analgesia has become the mainstay of postoperative pain management after knee arthroplasty. Among these, ACB replaces the once "gold standard" femoral nerve block (FNB) by offering comparable and effective analgesia with better preservation of quadriceps function. It is generally safe and efficient to use 0.2% ropivacaine ACB with initial loading doses of 15-30 mL and continual loading doses of less than 8 mL/hour to give analgesia comparable to FNB with minimal impact on lower extremity muscular strength. However, the risk of patient falls must still be taken into consideration by medical staff. Adjuvants like dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone used in ACB can increase the analgesic duration and postoperative analgesic impact. As a perineural adjunct for ACB, 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine may strike a balance between safety and analgesic efficacy.

Conclusion

ACB is a safe and effective analgesia method after knee arthroplasty. The adductor canal anatomy, the optimum blocking strategy and blocking site of ACB are all hotly debated and still require additional study due to the significant variety of the nerve structures in adductor canal.

Ambulatory anesthesia and discharge: an update around guidelines and trends

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Provide an oversight of recent changes in same-day discharge (SDD) of patient following surgery/anesthesia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways in combination with less invasive surgical techniques have dramatically changed perioperative care. Preparing and optimizing patients preoperatively, minimizing surgical trauma, using fast-acting anesthetics as well as multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia regime and liberal prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting are basic cornerstones. The scope being to maintain physiology and minimize the impact on homeostasis and subsequently hasten and improve recovery.

SUMMARY

The increasing adoption of enhanced protocols, including the entire perioperative care bundle, in combination with increased use of minimally invasive surgical techniques have shortened hospital stay. More intermediate procedures are today transferred to ambulatory pathways; SDD or overnight stay only. The traditional scores for assessing discharge eligibility are however still valid. Stable vital signs, awake and oriented, able to ambulate with acceptable pain, and postoperative nausea and vomiting are always needed. Drinking and voiding must be acknowledged but mandatory. Escort and someone at home the first night following surgery are strongly recommended. Explicit information around postoperative care and how to contact healthcare in case of need, as well as a follow-up call day after surgery, are likewise of importance. Mobile apps and remote monitoring are techniques increasingly used to improve postoperative follow-up.

Key Components, Current Practice and Clinical Outcomes of ERAS Programs in Patients Undergoing Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have led to improvements in outcomes in several surgical fields, through multimodal optimization of patient pathways, reductions in complications, improved patient experiences and reductions in the length of stay. However, their use has not been uniformly recognized in all orthopedic fields, and there is still no consensus on the best implementation process. Here, we evaluated pre-, peri-, and post-operative key elements and clinical evidence of ERAS protocols, measurements, and associated outcomes in patients undergoing different orthopedic surgical procedures. A systematic literature search on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases was conducted to identify clinical studies, from 2012 to 2022. Out of the 1154 studies retrieved, 174 (25 on spine surgery, 4 on thorax surgery, 2 on elbow surgery and 143 on hip and/or knee surgery) were considered eligible for this review. Results showed that ERAS protocols improve the recovery from orthopedic surgery, decreasing the length of hospital stays (LOS) and the readmission rates. Comparative studies between ERAS and non-ERAS protocols also showed improvement in patient pain scores, satisfaction, and range of motion. Although ERAS protocols in orthopedic surgery are safe and effective, future studies focusing on specific ERAS elements, in particular for elbow, thorax and spine, are mandatory to optimize the protocols.

On the generalizability of same-day partial knee replacement surgery-A non-selective interventional study evaluating efficacy, patient satisfaction, and safety in a public hospital setting

PURPOSE

Programs referred to as Fast-Track/Rapid Recovery/Enhanced Recovery After Surgery have proven both effective and safe in joint replacement surgery, to the degree where same-day discharge (SDD) has been attempted in carefully selected cases at specialized outpatient units. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate a same-day surgery protocol regarding safety using the minor partial knee replacement (PKR) procedure by non-selectively recruiting patients at a public hospital for one consecutive year.

METHODS

33 unselected PKR cases were included in this open clinical trial. The inclusion/exclusion criteria were solely based on logistics, as all the procedures were medial PKRs, designated the first morning slots, and performed by one single-surgeon. Strict postoperative criteria based on vital parameters, urinary function, bleeding, and mobilization had to be met before discharge was considered. SDD rate, patient satisfaction, number of outpatient visits, adverse events and readmissions within 90 days were evaluated. A predetermined subgroup analysis was also conducted where patients <80 yrs. and with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification <III was compared with those aged ≥80 yrs. and/or ASA class ≥III.

RESULTS

29 of 33 (88%) successfully achieved SDD. In a univariate comparison, 100% of the patients <80 yrs. and ASA class <III achieved SDD, whereas a corresponding 43% applied for those aged ≥80 yrs. and/or ASA class ≥III (p = 0.001). A 93% overall satisfaction rate was reached. Only 8% extra outpatient visits were required, all occurring within the first 2 weeks (well in line with routine practice.) One plausible transient ischemic attack and one readmission caused by a penetrating trauma not affecting the knee were identified, both of which happened 10 weeks after surgery. No adverse events or readmissions occurred within the first 48 hours of surgery.

CONCLUSION

When following strict criteria for discharge, same-day partial knee replacement surgery may be both feasible and safe, even without preselection of patients.

Introduction of day case hip and knee replacement programme at an inpatient ward is safe and may expedite shortening of hospital stays of traditional arthroplasties

PURPOSE

We investigated the safety of primary hip and knee replacements with same day discharge (SDD) and their effect on length of stay (LOS) of traditional inpatient arthroplasties at our elective orthopaedic ward.

METHODS

200 patients underwent elective, unilateral primary day case total hip (THA, n = 94), total knee (TKA, n = 60) and unicondylar knee replacements (UKA, n = 46). SDD rates, reasons for failure to discharge, readmission, complication and satisfaction rates were recorded at 6-week follow up. Changes in LOS of inpatient arthroplasties (n = 6518) and rate of patients discharged with only one night stay treated at the same ward were tracked from 1 year prior to introduction of day case arthroplasty (DCA) program to the end of observation period.

RESULTS

166 patients (83%) had SDD while 34 (17%) needed overnight stay. Main reasons for failure to discharge were lack of confidence (4%) fainting due to single vasovagal episode (3.5%), urine retention (3%) and late resolution of spinal anaesthesia (3%). 5 patients (3%) had readmission within 6 weeks, including 1 (0.6%) with a partial and treated pulmonary embolism. 163 patients were satisfied with SDD (98%). After launching the DCA program, average LOS of inpatients was reduced from 2.3 days to 1.8 days and rate of discharge with only 1-night stay increased from 12% to around 60%.

CONCLUSION

Introduction of routine SDD hip and knee arthroplasty programme at an elective orthopaedic centre is safe and also may confer wider benefits leading to shorter inpatient hospital stays.