Manipulation under anaesthesia after primary total knee arthroplasty : minimal differences in intravenous sedation alone versus neuraxial anaesthesia

Spinal versus general anaesthesia in contemporary primary total knee arthroplasties

Aims

Spinal anaesthesia has seen increased use in contemporary primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). However, controversy exists about the benefits of spinal in comparison to general anaesthesia in primary TKAs. This study aimed to investigate the pain control, length of stay (LOS), and complications associated with spinal versus general anaesthesia in primary TKAs from a single, high-volume academic centre.

Methods

We retrospectively identified 17,690 primary TKAs (13,297 patients) from 2001 to 2016 using our institutional total joint registry, where 52% had general anaesthesia and 48% had spinal anaesthesia. Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts with a mean age of 68 years (SD 10), 58% female (n = 7,669), and mean BMI of 32 kg/m2 (SD 7). Pain was evaluated using oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) and numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) data. Complications including 30- and 90-day readmissions were studied. Data were analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted model based on propensity score that included many patient and surgical factors. Mean follow-up was seven years (2 to 18).

Results

Patients treated with spinal anaesthesia required fewer postoperative OMEs (p < 0.001) and had lower NPRS scores (p < 0.001). Spinal anaesthesia also had fewer cases of altered mental status (AMS; odds ratio (OR) 1.3; p = 0.044), as well as 30-day (OR 1.4; p < 0.001) and 90-day readmissions (OR 1.5; p < 0.001). General anaesthesia was associated with increased risk of any revision (OR 1.2; p = 0.021) and any reoperation (1.3; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

In the largest single institutional report to date, we found that spinal anaesthesia was associated with significantly lower OME use, lower risk of AMS, and lower overall 30- and 90-day readmissions following primary TKAs. Additionally, spinal anaesthesia was associated with reduced risk of any revision and any reoperation after accounting for numerous patient and operative factors. When possible and safe, spinal anaesthesia should be considered in primary TKAs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1209–1214.

Understanding rates, risk factors, and complications associated with manipulation under anesthesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA): An analysis of 100,613 TKAs

BACKGROUND

Considering the growing adoption of technology-assisted total knee arthroplasties (TKA), previous database studies evaluating post-operative stiffness may be outdated. The present study aimed to: (1) evaluate the incidence of manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) after primary TKA; (2) determine independent risk factors for MUA; and (3) assess complications after MUA.

METHODS

Primary TKAs, with at least 6-month follow-up, were identified from the Florida State Inpatient Database (January 2016-June 2018) and linked to outpatient records from the Florida State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to compare patient factors and complications (e.g., mechanical, non-mechanical, infectious) associated with MUA, while adjusting for baseline demographics, comorbidities, use of robotic- and computer-technologies, time to MUA (0-3, 3-12, or >12 months), and need for repeat MUA (one-time vs >1).

RESULTS

The MUA rate was 2.8% (2821 of 100,613). Being younger, a woman, Black or Hispanic; having private or self-pay insurance; and conventional TKA were associated with significantly higher odds of undergoing MUA. Higher rates of mechanical complications and acute posthemorrhagic anemia were observed in the MUA cohort. Time to MUA, repeat MUA, and baseline demographics were not associated with complication rates among the MUA cohort.

CONCLUSION

Overall, 1 in 36 patients underwent MUA after primary TKA. Several non-modifiable patient characteristics, such as Black or Hispanic race, female sex, and younger age were associated with an increased risk of MUA. However, technology-assisted TKA might help to decrease the risk of MUA.

Sensor-guided gap balance versus manual gap balance in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Background

Despite Vast improvements in technology and surgical technique in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), approximately 15–25% TKAs, have suboptimal subjective clinical outcomes. Our study sought to evaluate if sensor-guided balancing improves postoperative clinical outcomes compared to a conventional gap balancing technique.

Methods

We searched Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Library, Highwire, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang database in March 2022 to identify studies involving sensor-guided balancing versus conventional gap balancing technique in TKA. Finally, we identified 2147 knees assessed in nine studies.

Results

Compared with manual gap balancing, Sensor-guided gap balancing resulted in less rate of Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) (P = 0.02), however more rate of intraoperative additional procedures (P = 0.0003). There were no significant differences in terms of KSS (P = 0.21), KSS Function score (P = 0.36), OKS (P = 0.61), KOOS (P = 0.78), operative time (P = 0.17), Mechanical axis (P = 0.69) and rate of reoperation between two groups.

Conclusion

Compared with conventional manual gap balancing techniques, sensors have more balancing procedures being performed. However, it did result in a reduction in the rate of MUA. More extensive, high-quality RCTs are required to verify our findings further.