Article

Current practice patterns in primary hip and knee arthroplasty among members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons.

Department of Orthopedics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.
The Journal of arthroplasty (Impact Factor: 1.79). 09/2010; 25(6 Suppl):2-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.04.033
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A poll was conducted at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons to determine current practices among its members in primary total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty. This article summarizes the audience responses to a number of multiple choice questions concerning perioperative management and operative practice patterns and preferences including anesthetic choices, blood management, surgical approaches, implant selection, implant fixation, bearing surface choice, postoperative rehabilitation, recommended postoperative activity restrictions, and antibiotic prophylaxis.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
72 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Routine patellar resurfacing performed at the time of knee arthroplasty is controversial, with some evidence of utility in both TKA (tricompartmental) and bicompartmental knee arthroplasty. However, whether one approach results in better implant survival remains unclear. We asked whether (1) routine patellar resurfacing in TKAs resulted in lower cumulative revision rates compared to bicompartmental knee arthroplasties, (2) patella-friendly implants resulted in lower cumulative revision rates than earlier designs, and (3) bicompartmental knee arthroplasties revised to TKAs had higher cumulative revision rates than primary TKAs. From a community-based joint registry, we identified 8135 patients treated with 9530 cemented, all-polyethylene patella TKAs and 627 bicompartmental knee arthroplasties without patellar resurfacing. We compared age, gender, year of index procedure, diagnosis, cruciate status, revision, and revision reason. TKAs had a lower cumulative revision rate for patella-only revision than bicompartmental knee arthroplasties (0.8% versus 4.8%). Adjusting for age, bicompartmental knee arthroplasties were 6.9 times more likely to undergo patellar revision than TKAs. There was no difference in the cumulative revision rate for patella-only revisions between patella-friendly and earlier designs. The cumulative revision rate for any second revision after a patella-only revision was 12.7% for bicompartmental knee arthroplasties while that for primary TKAs was 6.3%. Bicompartmental knee arthroplasties had higher revision rates than TKAs. Femoral component design did not influence the cumulative revision rate. Secondary patella resurfacing in a bicompartmental knee arthroplasty carried an increased revision risk compared to resurfacing at the time of index TKA. To reduce the probability of reoperation for patellofemoral problems, our data suggest the patella should be resurfaced at the time of index surgery.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 08/2011; 470(1):211-9. · 2.79 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Acute postoperative infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is typically treated with irrigation and débridement and exchange of the modular femoral head and acetabular liner. Given a rate of failure exceeding 50% in some series, a one-stage exchange has been suggested as a potential alternative because it allows more thorough débridement and removal of colonized implants. To date, most studies published on the one-stage exchange have used microbe-specific antibiotic-laden bone cement with only one small single-institution series that reported outcomes after a cementless one-stage exchange. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined whether a one-stage cementless exchange for treating acute postoperative infection after THA would result in infection control with component retention and normalization of infection markers. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 27 patients who underwent a one-stage exchange performed for an acute (≤ 6 weeks) postoperative infection after THA from April 2004 to December 2009. Primary cementless components were used both at the time of the index arthroplasty and the revision in all patients. Surgery was followed by a 6-week course of culture-specific antibiotics in all patients and a variable course of oral antibiotics. Our primary outcome was retention of the implants at most recent followup and our secondary outcome was normalization of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at most recent followup. Patients were followed until failure or a minimum of 2 years. RESULTS: At a minimum followup of 27 months (mean, 50 months; range, 27-89 months), 19 of the 27 patients (70%) retained their implants but four required further operative débridement with component retention at a mean of 3 weeks (range, 2-6 weeks) to obtain control of infection. Thus, an isolated single-stage exchange was successful in 15 of the 27 patients (56%). Eight patients (30%) ultimately had a two-stage exchange for persistent infection; seven of these patients required no further surgery, whereas one patient required a second two-stage exchange. Of those patients retaining their prosthesis after one-stage exchange and tracked with ESR and CRP, four (33% [four of 12]) had elevated values without other signs or symptoms of recurrent infection. CONCLUSIONS: For acute postoperative infection after primary THA, a one-stage cementless exchange allowed 70% of patients to retain their implants at most recent followup. Of those patients who ultimately went on to a two-stage exchange, only one required a second two-stage exchange. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 06/2013; · 2.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The majority (86%) of THAs performed in the United States are uncemented. This may increase the revision burden if uncemented fixation is associated with a higher risk of revision than other approaches. QUESTION/PURPOSES: We sought to investigate trends for use of uncemented fixation and to analyze age-stratified risk of revision comparing cemented, hybrid, and uncemented fixation as reported by national hip arthroplasty registries. METHODS: Data were extracted from the annual reports of seven national hip arthroplasty registries; we included all national registries for which annual reports were available in English or a Scandinavian language, if the registry had a history of more than 5 years of data collection. RESULTS: Current use of uncemented fixation in primary THAs varies between 15% in Sweden and 82% in Canada. From 2006 to 2010 the registries of all countries reported overall increases in the use of uncemented fixation; Sweden reported the smallest absolute increase (from 10% to 15%), and Denmark reported the greatest absolute increase (from 47% to 68%). Looking only at the oldest age groups, use of uncemented fixation also was increasing during the period. In the oldest age group of each of the registries we surveyed (age older than 65 years for England-Wales; age older than 75 years in three registries), cemented fixation was associated with a lower risk of revision than was uncemented fixation. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing use of uncemented fixation in THA is a worldwide phenomenon. This trend is paradoxic, given that registry data, which represent nationwide THA outcomes, suggest that cemented fixation in patients older than 75 years results in the lowest risk of revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 03/2013; · 2.79 Impact Factor