Body Mass Index Does Not Drive the Risk for Early Postoperative Instability After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Instability remains the leading cause of revision following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of the present investigation was to determine whether an elevated body mass index (BMI) is associated with an increased risk of instability after primary THA.

METHODS

An administrative claims database was queried for patients undergoing elective, primary THA for osteoarthritis between 2010 and 2022. Patients who underwent THA for a femoral neck fracture were excluded. Patients who had an elevated BMI were grouped into the following cohorts: 25 to 29.9 (n = 2,313), 30 to 34.9 (n = 2,230), 35 to 39.9 (n = 1,852), 40 to 44.9 (n = 1,450), 45 to 49.9 (n = 752), and 50 to 59.9 (n = 334). Patients were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, as well as a history of spinal fusion, neurodegenerative disorders, and alcohol abuse, to controls with a normal BMI (20 to 24.9). A multivariate logistic regression controlling for age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and additional risk factors for dislocation was used to evaluate dislocation rates at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Rates of revision for instability were similarly compared at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

No significant differences in dislocation rate were observed between control patients and each of the evaluated BMI classes at all evaluated postoperative intervals (all P values > .05). Similarly, the risk of revision for instability was comparable between the normal weight cohort and each evaluated BMI class at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively (all P values > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Controlling for comorbidities and known risk factors for instability, the present analysis demonstrated no difference in rates of dislocation or revision for instability between normal-weight patients and those in higher BMI classes.

Revision Risk of Unipolar and Bipolar Hemiarthroplasties in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register

BACKGROUND

Hemiarthroplasty (HA) for hip fractures can be performed with a unipolar or bipolar head. We describe the use of unipolar and bipolar HA after a hip fracture in the Netherlands and determined revision rates and risk factors.

METHODS

All HAs for an acute hip fracture registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) during 2007 to 2021 were included; 44,127(88%) unipolar and 6,013(12%) bipolar HAs. Competing risk survival analyses were performed with revision for any reason as the endpoint. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed adjusting for patient and surgery-related factors.

RESULTS

The 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year revision rates were comparable for unipolar and bipolar HA. Cox regression analysis showed a hazard ratio of 1.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 1.4)) after adjustment for confounders for bipolar heads. In cases of a cemented stem, the 1-year cumulative incidence of revision was lower (1.5% (CI 1.4 to 1.7%) compared to uncemented stems (2.4% (CI 2.1 to 2.7%); uncemented stems showed higher risks for revision after adjustment compared to cemented stems (hazard ratio 1.4 (CI 1.2 to 1.5)). The anterior, antero-lateral, and straight-lateral approach showed lower risk for revision compared to the postero-lateral approach.

CONCLUSION

The revision rate for bipolar HA and unipolar HA was comparable. However, after adjustment for potential confounders the risk for revision showed an estimated 20% increased revision risk for bipolar heads, although not statistically significant. For both head types, the risk for revision was significantly higher when an uncemented stem was chosen or the postero-lateral approach was used.

Up to 10-year surveillance comparison of survivability in single-level cervical disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in New York

OBJECTIVE

Cervical disc replacement (CDR) is an alternative treatment to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), which is the current gold standard, for degenerative cervical diseases such as cervical spondylotic myelopathy and cervical radiculopathy. CDR has several theoretical benefits over ACDF, including preservation of motion, earlier return to unrestricted activity, and potentially a lower risk of adjacent-segment disease. Recent literature has reported positive clinical results for CDR, but few studies have investigated the long-term risk of revision surgery of CDR versus ACDF. The purpose of this study was to identify and analyze the epidemiological, clinical, and operative risk factors that affect revision rates following single-level CDR and ACDF procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort was extracted from the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System using ICD-9 and CPT codes. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing primary, subaxial (C3-7), single-level ACDF or CDR for cervical radiculopathy and/or cervical spondylotic myelopathy between 2005 and 2013. Survivability was defined as the time between the index procedure and the presence of a subsequent discharge record for cervical spinal fusion or disc replacement. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square tests, t-tests, Cox proportional hazards models, and a Kaplan-Meier plot.

RESULTS

A total of 7450 patients were included in this study (6615 ACDF and 835 CDR). When adjusted for patient demographics, the hazard ratios showed no significant differences in the incidence of revision risk between the two cohorts. The CDR cohort had a higher incidence of postoperative dysphagia (p < 0.05). Patients undergoing ACDF had a longer average hospital stay (2.8 vs 1.9 days, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in time to revision surgery (p = 0.486).

CONCLUSIONS

CDR and ACDF have both been shown to be effective treatments for cervical spine disease. CDR patients had a shorter average inpatient hospital stay compared with ACDF patients but tended to experience dysphagia more frequently. There was a tendency toward increased survivability of CDR; however, this was not found to be statistically significant at any time point. The large size and heterogeneity of each cohort and the availability of > 10 years of surveillance data differentiate this study from other published literature. This investigation has limitations inherent to large data analysis studies, including the implementation and inaccuracy of diagnosis and procedural coding; however, this reflects real-world use of coding by practitioners.

Mid-Term Survival of Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Younger Than 55-year-old

BACKGROUND

Survivorship of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in younger patients is concerning given the inverse relationship between age and lifetime risk for revision. The purpose of this study is to determine if risk of revision has improved for patients aged 55 years or younger who undergo primary THA using modern polyethylene liners.

METHODS

A retrospective review identified 2,461 consented patients (2,814 hips) with minimum 2-year follow-up who underwent primary THA at our institution between September 2007 and August 2014 using components from a single manufacturer (Zimmer Biomet), all with vitamin E-infused highly crosslinked polyethylene acetabular inserts. There were 561 patients (643 THA; 23%) aged 55 or younger and 1,900 (2,171 THA; 77%) older than 55.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 5.0 years for both groups. There were more male patients in the younger (55%) than older (41%) group. Body mass index (BMI) was higher in younger patients independent of gender. Improvement in Harris hip score (HHS) was similar between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival to endpoint of all cause revision was similar between groups at 12 years (P = .8808) with 97.5% (95% CI: ±0.7%) for younger versus 97.1% (95% CI: ±0.6%) for older patients. Most frequent reason for revision overall was periprosthetic femoral fracture (21; 0.75%); univariate analysis revealed risk factors were female gender (P = .28) and age ≥65 years (P = .012).

CONCLUSION

Use of modern polyethylene, such as vitamin E-stabilized highly cross-linked, liners during THA may improve survivorship in younger patients undergoing THA. Younger patients undergoing primary THA with highly cross-linked polyethylene liners had no increased rate of revision at mid-term follow-up.

Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Retrospective Tertiary Center Analysis

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains one of the most common causes of revision knee arthroplasty. Controversy continues to surround the proper operative technique of PJI in knee arthroplasty with single- or two-stage replacement. Significant variations are seen in the eradication rates of PJI and in implant survival rates. This detailed retrospective analysis of a single tertiary center is intended to provide further data and insight comparing single- and two-stage revision surgery. A retrospective analysis of all revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgeries from 2013 to 2019 was performed and screened with respect to single- or two-stage TKA revisions. Single- and two-stage revisions were analyzed with regard to implant survival, revision rate, microbiological spectrum, and other typical demographic characteristics. A total of 63 patients were included, with 15 patients undergoing single-stage revision and 48 patients undergoing two-stage revision. The mean follow-up time was 40.7 to 43.7 months. Statistically, no difference was found between both groups in overall survival (54.4% vs. 70.1%, p = 0.68) and implant survival with respect to reinfection (71.4% vs. 82.4%, p = 0.48). Further, high reinfection rates were found for patients with difficult-to-treat organisms and low- to semi-constrained implant types, in comparison to constrained implant types. A statistically comparable revision rate for recurrence of infection could be shown for both groups, although a tendency to higher reinfection rate for single-stage change was evident. The revision rate in this single-center study was comparably high, which could be caused by the high comorbidity and high proportion of difficult-to-treat bacteria in patients at a tertiary center. In this patient population, the expectation of implant survival should be critically discussed with patients.

Impact of previous non-arthroplasty surgery on clinical outcomes after primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this study were to address the following questions regarding previous non-arthroplasty surgery prior to primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty (either total shoulder arthroplasty [TSA] or ream-and-run arthroplasty): (1) To what degree is primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty after prior non-arthroplasty surgery associated with inferior clinical outcomes and higher revision rates compared with arthroplasty without previous surgery? (2) Does type, approach, or timing of previous surgery affect outcomes after anatomic arthroplasty?

METHODS

A retrospective review of a primary shoulder arthroplasty database was performed and identified 640 patients undergoing anatomic shoulder arthroplasty (345 TSAs and 295 ream-and-run arthroplasties). Of these patients, 183 (29%) underwent previous non-arthroplasty surgery. Baseline and demographic information, 2-year postoperative outcome scores, and revision surgical procedures with associated culture results were collected.

RESULTS

In patients undergoing TSA, previous non-arthroplasty surgery was associated with a significantly lower 2-year Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score (P = .010), percentage maximum possible improvement (MPI) (P = .024), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score (P < .001) and a higher rate of reoperation (P < .001). In patients undergoing ream-and-run arthroplasty, previous non-arthroplasty surgery was associated with a nonsignificantly lower 2-year SST score, percentage MPI, and SANE score and higher reoperation rate. Prior fracture surgery carried a higher risk of reoperation than other types of surgery including rotator cuff repair and instability surgery. Among TSA and ream-and-run arthroplasty cases with prior non-arthroplasty surgery, prior open surgery and the time interval from most recent surgery were associated with nonsignificant differences in the 2-year SST score, percentage MPI, SANE score, and revision risk.

CONCLUSION

Previous surgery is associated with inferior clinical outcomes and higher revision rates in patients undergoing index TSA but not in those undergoing the ream-and-run procedure. Patients with previous fracture surgery carry the highest risk of reoperation.

The association between glenoid component design and revision risk in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is a proven treatment for glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis, with superior results compared with hemiarthroplasty. However, glenoid component loosening remains a problem and is one of the most common causes of failure in TSA. Multiple component designs have been developed in an attempt to reduce loosening rates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate risk of revision after anatomic TSA according to the glenoid component design.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study including patients aged ≥18 years who underwent primary elective TSA for the diagnosis of osteoarthritis between 2010 and 2017. Patients with missing implant information, who received stemless humeral implants, or who received augmented glenoid implants, were excluded. Glenoid component designs used were categorized into 4 mutually exclusive treatment groups: polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth, polyethylene-metal hybrid, polyethylene all-cemented pegged, and polyethylene cemented keeled. Multivariable competing risk regression was used to evaluate the risk of glenoid loosening as a cause-specific revision by the glenoid component design.

RESULTS

Of the 5566 TSA included in the final cohort, 39.2% of glenoid implants were polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth, 31.1% were polyethylene-metal hybrid, 26.0% were polyethylene all-cemented pegged, and 3.6% were polyethylene cemented keeled. At 6-year final follow-up, 4.1% of TSA were revised for any cause, and 1.4% for glenoid loosening. Compared with the polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth design, no difference in glenoid loosening revision risk was observed for the polyethylene-metal hybrid design (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42-3.20). However, both the polyethylene all-cemented pegged (HR = 2.48, 95% CI = 1.08-5.66) and polyethylene cemented keeled (HR = 3.84, 95% CI = 1.13-13.00) designs had higher risks for revision due to glenoid loosening.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed glenoid component designs to be associated with differential risks in revision due to glenoid loosening with polyethylene all-cemented pegged glenoids and polyethylene cemented keeled glenoids having higher risks when compared with polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth glenoids. Surgeons may want to consider the glenoid component design when performing anatomic TSA.

Risk Factors for Intraoperative Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures During Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. An Analysis From the National Joint Registry for England and Wales and the Isle of Man

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to estimate risk factors for intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (IOPFF) and each anatomic subtype (calcar crack, trochanteric fracture, femoral shaft fracture) during primary total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 793,823 primary total hip arthroplasties between 2004 and 2016. Multivariable regression modeling was used to estimate relative risk of patient, surgical, and implant factors for any IOPFF and for all anatomic subtypes of IOPFF. Clinically important interactions were assessed using multivariable regression.

RESULTS

Patient factors significantly increasing the risk of fracture were female gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 3 to 5, and preoperative diagnosis including avascular necrosis of the hip, previous trauma, inflammatory disease, pediatric disease, and previous infection. Overall risk of IOPFF associated with age was greatest in patients below 50 years and above 80 years. Risk of any fracture reduced with computer-guided surgery and in non-National Health Service hospitals. Nonposterior approaches increased the risk of shaft and trochanteric fracture only. Cementless implants significantly increased the risk of only calcar cracks and shaft fractures and not trochanteric fractures.

CONCLUSION

Fracture risk increases in patients younger than 50 and older than 80 years, females, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 3 to 5, and indications other than primary osteoarthritis. Large cumulative reduction in IOPFF risk may occur with use of cemented implants, posterior approach, and computer-guided surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3b (cohort study).

Persistent Opioid Use Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Signal for Close Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Prolonged opioid use following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has not been extensively studied.

METHODS

A cohort study of primary TKA for osteoarthritis using an integrated healthcare system and Total Joint Replacement Registry (January 2008-December 2011) was conducted. Opioid use during the first year after TKA was the exposure of interest and cumulative daily oral morphine equivalent (OME) amounts were calculated. Total postsurgical OME per 90-day exposure periods were categorized into quartiles. The end point was aseptic revision surgery. Survival analyses were conducted and hazard ratios (HRs) were adjusted for age, gender, prior analgesic use, opioid-related comorbidities, and chronic pain diagnoses.

RESULTS

A total of 24,105 patients were studied. After the initial 90-day postoperative period, 41.5% (N = 9914) continued to use opioids. Also, 155 (0.6%) revisions occurred within 1 year and 377 (1.6%) within 5 years. Compared to patients not taking any opioids, patients using medium-low to high OME after the initial 90-day period had a higher adjusted risk of 1-year revision, ranging from HR = 2.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.3-4.5) to HR = 33 (95% confidence interval, 10-110) depending on the OME and time period.

CONCLUSION

Patients who require opioids beyond 90 days after TKA warrant close follow-up.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Can Be Used to Streamline Post-Total Hip Arthroplasty Follow-Up to High-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used to capture the patients' perspective in total hip arthroplasty (THA). They can potentially be used to streamline post-THA follow-up to high-risk patients. We aimed to determine whether the long-term revision risk in THA relates to patient-reported measures at 2 and 5 years.

METHODS

In a single-institution cohort of primary THA procedures, we examined the association between 2-year and 5-year pain and Mayo Hip Scores and the risk of revision.

RESULTS

The absolute scores at 2 and 5 years were both significantly associated with the risk of revisions. Every 10-unit decline in the 2-year Mayo Hip Score <60 was associated with a significant 50% increase in the risk of revision (hazard ratio, 1.5 per 10 units; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.8). Similarly, every 10-unit decline in the 5-year Mayo Hip Score <60 was associated with almost doubling of the risk of revision (hazard ratio, 1.9 per 10 units; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.1).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that patient-reported outcomes in THA have prognostic importance and can be taken into account when planning frequency of aftercare. This will improve the efficiency of follow-up in large registry-based follow-up efforts.

Cementless total hip arthroplasty with large diameter metal-on-metal heads: short-term survivorship of 8059 hips from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Population-based register data from the National Joint Register of Australia and England and Wales have revealed that the mid-term outcome of cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty is inferior to that of conventional cemented metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to compare the results of cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty with conventional cemented arthroplasty in Finland. The second aim of this study was to compare the cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal models with each other.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Based on the data extracted from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register, the risk of revision of 8059 cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasties performed during 2002-2009 was analyzed using Cox regression model. The revision risk of these hips was compared to that of 16,978 cemented metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasties performed during the same time period.

RESULTS

In the Cox regression analysis, there was no difference in revision risks between cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and cemented metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty (relative risk = 0.90, confidence interval = 0.74-1.10, p = 0.3). However, in female patients aged 55 years or above, cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip replacements showed a significantly increased risk of revision as compared to cemented total hip replacements (relative risk = 1.33, confidence interval = 1.04-1.70). Compared to the reference implant in this study (cementless Synergy stem combined with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing [BHR] cup), the CementLess Spotorno (CLS) stem combined with Durom cup had a 2.9-fold (95% confidence interval = 1.17-6.90) increased risk of revision.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty had short-term survivorship compared with cemented total hip arthroplasty at a nation-wide level. However, in female patients aged 55 years or above, cementless large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty showed inferior results. Furthermore, implant design had an influence on revision rates. Longer follow-up time is needed to assess the success of large diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.