National trends in total hip arthroplasty for traumatic hip fractures: An analysis of a nationwide all-payer database.

BACKGROUND: Hemiarthroplasty (HA) has traditionally been the treatment of choice for elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures. Ideal treatment for younger, ambulatory patients is not as clear. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been increasingly utilized in this population however the factors associated with undergoing HA or THA have not been fully elucidated. AIM: To examine what patient characteristics are associated with undergoing THA or HA. To determine if outcomes differ between the groups. METHODS: We queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for patients that underwent HA or THA for a femoral neck fracture between 2005 and 2014. The NIS comprises a large representative sample of inpatient hospitalizations in the United States. International Classifications of Disease, Ninth Edition (ICD-9) codes were used to identify patients in our sample. Demographic variables, hospital characteristics, payer status, medical comorbidities and mortality rates were compared between the two procedures. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was then performed to identify independent risk factors of treatment utilized. RESULTS: Of the total 502060 patients who were treated for femoral neck fracture, 51568 (10.3%) underwent THA and the incidence of THA rose from 8.3% to 13.7%. Private insurance accounted for a higher percentage of THA than hemiarthroplasty. THA increased most in urban teaching hospitals relative to urban non-teaching hospitals. Mean length of stay (LOS) was longer for HA. The mean charges were less for HA, however charges decreased steadily for both groups. HA had a higher mortality rate, however, after adjusting for age and comorbidities HA was not an independent risk factor for mortality. Interestingly, private insurance was an independent predictor for treatment with THA. CONLUSION: There has been an increase in the use of THA for the treatment of femoral neck fractures in the United States, most notably in urban hospitals. HA and THA are decreasing in total charges and LOS

The effect of high dose antibiotic impregnated cement on rate of surgical site infection after hip hemiarthroplasty for fractured neck of femur : a protocol for a double-blind quasi randomised controlled trial

Background: Mortality following hip hemiarthroplasty is in the range of 10-40% in the first year, with much attributed to post-operative complications. One such complication is surgical site infection (SSI), which at the start of this trial affected 4.68% of patients in the UK having this operation. Compared to SSI rates of elective hip surgery, at less than 1%, this figure is elevated. The aim of this quasi randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to determine if high dose antibiotic impregnated cement can reduce the SSI in patients at 12-months after hemiarthroplasty for intracapsular fractured neck of femur. Methods: 848 patients with an intracapsular fractured neck of femur requiring a hip hemiarthroplasty are been recruited into this two-centre double-blind quasi RCT. Participants were recruited before surgery and quasi randomised to standard care or intervention group. Participants, statistician and outcome assessors were blind to treatment allocation throughout the study. The intervention consisted of high dose antibiotic impregnated cement consisting of 1 gram Clindamycin and 1 gram of Gentamicin. The primary outcome is Health Protection Agency (HPA) defined deep surgical site infection at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include HPA defined superficial surgical site infection at 30 days, 30 and 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, critical care stay, and complications. Discussion: Large randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of a surgical intervention are uncommon, particularly in the speciality of orthopaedics. The results from this trial will inform evidence-based recommendations for antibiotic impregnated cement in the management of patients with a fractured neck of femur undergoing a hip hemiarthroplasty. If high dose antibiotic impregnated cement is found to be an effective intervention, implementation into clinical practice could improve long-term outcomes for patients undergoing hip hemiarthroplasty

Revision of reversed shoulder arthroplasty : is a reoperation possible?

Introduction. As the number of reversed shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) procedures increases, the revision rate will also increase. In case of severe bone insufficiency, instability or infection of the primary RSA, revision to another RSA is preferable but not always possible. Hemiarthroplasty (HA), spacers and resection arthroplasty (RA) have been described in this indication. Materials and methods. Between 2004 and 2016, 20 shoulders in 19 patientswere treated at Ghent University Hospital for failed revision of RSA. Nine received a megahead prosthesis, a spacerwas implanted in 6, and 5 underwent RA. Results. Indications for implantation of a megahead prosthesis were loosening RSA (n = 5), infection (n = 4), dislocation (n = 1) and nerve irritation (n = 1). Improvement of range ofmotionwas observed. Anterosuperior migration of the prosthesis was noted in 2 patients. Another 2 patients were ultimately revised to RSA. Seven permanent spacerswere implanted for infection, of which 2 remain in place till today. The other 5 were revised to RSA. Of the 5 patients treated with RA, 3 were revised further on to RSA, resulting in pain relief and regain of function. Discussion. Our study shows that amegahead prosthesis has better functional results than RA, but is inferior to RSA. Due to increasing surgical experience and improving technique, 9 patients could ultimately be reconverted to another RSA. A review of current literature is presented. In HA and RA, the functional results are poor, and pain relief is uncertain. Results of spacers are variable and can be satisfactory. Arthrodesis is a last resort. Conclusion. In our case series study, a hemiarthroplasty can be performed in case of failure of RSA. However, the results are inferior to another RSA

Reverse shoulder prosthesis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review

PURPOSE: To obtain detailed information on the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) METHODS: A literature search was conducted for studies reporting on the use of RSA in RA patients from 1990 to 2014. The inclusion criteria were a report of sufficient information on pre-operative status and surgical outcome allowing evaluation of the therapeutic potential of RSA in RA. The literature search resulted in 586 hits, but only five studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed. RESULTS: There were 100 shoulders that had been operated on, of which 87 were followed for a mean of 55.4 months, the longest follow-up being 11.9 years Most patients had glenohumeral erosive lesions of Larsen Grade III or IV. The Delta III prosthesis was implanted in most cases and in three studies bone graft was used for severe glenoid lesions. The main outcome measures employed were the Constant score (Cs) and ASES questionnaire. The mean increase in Cs and ASES score after surgery was 42.4 and 54 points, respectively. The mean post-operative forward elevation was 120.6°, the average increment being 51° and the mean increase of abduction was 58.5°. The mean prevalence of scapular notching was 35.4 %. The rate of adverse events was 31 %, but the vast majority were of minor severity. Eight prostheses underwent revision, due to infection in four. CONCLUSIONS: RSA implanted in RA patients would appear to give similar results to those obtained in massive cuff tears with or without arthropathy

Management and radiographic outcomes of femoral head fractures.

BackgroundFemoral head fractures are uncommon injuries. Small series constitute the majority of the available literature. Surgical approach and fracture management is variable. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, method of treatment, and outcomes of consecutive femoral head fractures at a regional academic Level I trauma center.Materials and methodsA retrospective review of a prospective database was performed over a 13-year period. All AO/OTA 31C femoral head fractures were identified. A surgical approach and fixation method was recorded. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed for patients with 6 months or greater follow-up. Radiographs were evaluated for fixation failure, heterotopic ossification (HO), avascular necrosis (AVN) and post-traumatic arthritis.ResultsWe identified 164 fractures in 163 patients; 147 fractures were available for review. Treatment was operative reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in 78 (53.1%), fragment excision in 37 (25.1%) and non-operative in 28 (19%). An anterior approach and mini-fragment screws were used in the majority of patients treated with fixation. Sixty-nine fractures had follow-up greater than 6 months. Sixty-two fractures (89.9%) proceeded to uneventful union. All Pipkin III fractures failed operative fixation. Six patients developed AVN, seven patients had a known conversion to hip arthroplasty; HO developed in 28 (40.6%) patients and rarely required excision.ConclusionsFractures of the femoral head are rare. An anterior approach can be used for fragment excision or fixation using mini-fragment screws. Pipkin III fractures represent catastrophic injuries. Non-bridging, asymptomatic HO is common. AVN and posttraumatic degenerative disease of the hip occur but are uncommon.Level of evidenceIV-prognostic

Outcomes of Shoulder Arthroplasty Performed for Postinfectious Arthritis.

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional outcomes, infection rate, and complications associated with shoulder arthroplasty for sequelae of prior septic arthritis. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 17 patients who underwent shoulder arthroplasty for sequelae of septic arthritis. Patients were analyzed for patient-reported outcomes, complications, and reoperations. Results: The 17 patients in this cohort were an average age of 65.4 ± 12.2 years old, were 58.8% male, and had an average body mass index of 27.9 ± 4.1 kg/m Conclusions: Shoulder arthroplasty after septic arthritis had inconsistent functional outcomes and high complication rates but no reinfection

Antibiotic Spacers in Shoulder Arthroplasty: Comparison of Stemmed and Stemless Implants.

Background: Antibiotic spacers in shoulder periprosthetic joint infection deliver antibiotics locally and provide temporary stability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences between stemmed and stemless spacers. Methods: All spacers placed from 2011 to 2013 were identified. Stemless spacers were made by creating a spherical ball of cement placed in the joint space. Stemmed spacers had some portion in the humeral canal. Operative time, complications, reimplantation, reinfection, and range of motion were analyzed. Results: There were 37 spacers placed: 22 were stemless and 15 were stemmed. The stemless spacer population was older (70.9 ± 7.8 years vs. 62.8 ± 8.4 years, p = 0.006). The groups had a similar percentage of each gender (stemless group, 45% male vs. stemmed group, 40% male; p = 0.742), body mass index (stemless group, 29.1 ± 6.4 kg/m2 vs. stemmed group, 31.5 ± 8.3 kg/m2; p = 0.354) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (stemless group, 4.2 ± 1.2 vs. stemmed group, 4.2 ± 1.7; p = 0.958). Operative time was similar (stemless group, 127.5 ± 37.1 minutes vs. stemmed group, 130.5 ± 39.4 minutes). Two stemless group patients had self-resolving radial nerve palsies. Within the stemless group, 15 of 22 (68.2%) underwent reimplantation with 14 of 15 having forward elevation of 109° ± 23°. Within the stemmed group, 12 of 15 (80.0%, p = 0.427) underwent reimplantation with 8 of 12 having forward elevation of 94° ± 43° (range, 30° to 150°; p = 0.300). Two stemmed group patients had axillary nerve palsies, one of which self-resolved but the other did not. One patient sustained dislocation of reverse shoulder arthroplasty after reimplantation. One stemless group patient required an open reduction and glenosphere exchange of dislocated reverse shoulder arthroplasty at 6 weeks after reimplantation. Conclusions: Stemmed and stemless spacers had similar clinical outcomes. When analyzing all antibiotic spacers, over 70% were converted to revision arthroplasties. The results of this study do not suggest superiority of either stemmed or stemless antibiotic spacers