Short-term outcome of 1,465 computer-navigated primary total knee replacements 2005–2008: A report from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register

Background and purpose: Improvement of positioning and alignment by the use of computer-assisted surgery (CAS) might improve longevity and function in total knee replacements, but there is little evidence. In this study, we evaluated the short-term results of computer-navigated knee replacements based on data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Patients and methods: Primary total knee replacements without patella resurfacing, reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register during the years 2005–2008, were evaluated. The 5 most common implants and the 3 most common navigation systems were selected. Cemented, uncemented, and hybrid knees were included. With the risk of revision for any cause as the primary endpoint and intraoperative complications and operating time as secondary outcomes, 1,465 computer-navigated knee replacements (CAS) and 8,214 conventionally operated knee replacements (CON) were compared. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression analysis with adjustment for age, sex, prosthesis brand, fixation method, previous knee surgery, preoperative diagnosis, and ASA category were used. Results: Kaplan-Meier estimated survival at 2 years was 98% (95% CI: 97.5–98.3) in the CON group and 96% (95% CI: 95.0– 97.8) in the CAS group. The adjusted Cox regression analysis showed a higher risk of revision in the CAS group (RR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.1–2.5; p = 0.02). The LCS Complete knee had a higher risk of revision with CAS than with CON (RR = 2.1, 95% CI: 1.3–3.4; p = 0.004)). The differences were not statistically significant for the other prosthesis brands. Mean operating time was 15 min longer in the CAS group. Interpretation: With the introduction of computer-navigated knee replacement surgery in Norway, the short-term risk of revision has increased for computer-navigated replacement with the LCS Complete. The mechanisms of failure of these implantations should be explored in greater depth, and in this study we have not been able to draw conclusions regarding causation

Opioid use prior to knee arthroplasty in patients who catastrophize about their pain: preoperative data from a multisite randomized clinical trial

Daniel L Riddle,1 James D Slover,2 Dennis C Ang,3 Matthew J Bair,4 Kurt Kroenke,5 Robert A Perera,6 Levent Dumenci7 1Departments of Physical Therapy, Orthopaedic Surgery and Rheumatology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA; 2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; 3Department of Rheumatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Raleigh, NC, USA; 4Department of Medicine, VA Center for Health Information and Communication, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 5Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 6Department of Biostatistics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA; 7College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA Background: Opioid use rates prior to knee arthroplasty (KA) among people who catastrophize about their pain are unknown. We determined prevalence of opioid use and compared patterns of preoperative opioid use and oral morphine equivalent (OME), a measure of daily opioid dose, across varied geographic sites. We also determined which baseline variables were associated with opioid use and OME.Patients and methods: Preoperative opioid use data described type of opioid, dosage, and frequency among 397 patients scheduled for KA. Demographic, knee-related pain, and psychological distress dimensions were examined to identify variables associated with opioid use and opioid dose (OME). Opioid use prevalence and OME were compared across the four sites. A three-level censored regression determined variables associated with opioid use and OME.Results: The overall opioid use prevalence was 31.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 27.0, 36.3) and varied across sites from 15.9% (95% CI = 9.0, 22.8) to 51.2% (95% CI = 40.5, 61.9). After adjustment, patients using opioids were more likely to be younger, African American, and have higher self-efficacy and comorbidity scores (P < 0.05). The only variable independently associated with OME was lower depressive symptoms (P < 0.05).Conclusion: People who catastrophized prior to KA did not demonstrate increased preoperative opioid use based on current evidence, but variation in the prevalence of opioid use across study sites was substantial. Variables associated with opioid use were non-modifiable demographic and comorbidity variables. Keywords: pain, catastrophizing, opioid, knee, arthroplast

Relationship between cutting errors and learning curve in computer-assisted total knee replacement

Computer-assisted total knee replacement (TKR) has been shown to improve radiographic alignment. Continuous feedback from the navigation system allows accurate adjustment of the bone cuts, thus reducing errors. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of experience both with computer navigation and knee replacement surgery on the frequency of errors in intraoperative bone cuts and implant alignment. Three homogeneous patient groups undergoing computer assisted TKR were included in the study. Each group was treated by one of three surgeons with varying experience in computer-aided and knee replacement surgery. Surgeon A had extensive experience in knee replacement and computer-assisted surgery. Surgeon B was an experienced knee replacement surgeon. A general orthopaedic surgeon with limited knee replacement surgery experience performed all surgeries in group C. The cutting errors and the number of re-cuts were determined intraoperatively. The complications and mean surgical time were collected for each group. The postoperative frontal femoral component angle, frontal tibial component angle, hip–knee–ankle angle and component slopes were evaluated. The results showed that the number of cutting errors were lowest for TKR performed by the surgeon with experience in navigation. This difference was statistically significant when compared to the general orthopaedic surgeon. A statistically significant superior result was achieved in final mechanical axis alignment for the surgeon experienced in computer-guided surgery compared to the other two groups (179.3° compared to 178.9° and 178.1°). However, the total number of outliers was similar, with no statistically significant differences among the three surgeons. Experience with navigation significantly reduced the surgical time