Total blood loss after hip hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture: Anterior versus posterior approach.

INTRODUCTION: Femoral neck fractures constitute a public health problem due to significant associated morbidity and mortality amongst the ageing population. Perioperative blood loss can increase this morbidity. Blood loss, as well as the influence that the surgical approach exerts on it, remains poorly evaluated. We therefore conducted a retrospective comparative study in order to: (1) compare total blood loss depending on whether the patients were operated on using an anterior or posterior approach, (2) compare the transfusion rates, operating times and hospital stays between these two groups and, (3) analyze dislocation rates. HYPOTHESIS: Total blood loss is greater from an anterior approach following a hip hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture, compared to the posterior approach. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective single-center comparative study included 137 patients operated on by hip hemiarthroplasty between December 2020 and June 2021, and seven patients were excluded. One hundred and thirty patients were analyzed: 69 (53.1%) had been operated on via the anterior Hueter approach (AA) and 61 (46.9%) via the posterior Moore approach (PA). The analysis of total blood loss was based on the OSTHEO formula to collect perioperative "hidden" blood loss. The risk of early dislocation (less than 6 months) was also analyzed. RESULTS: Total blood loss was similar between the two groups, AA: 1626±506mL versus PA: 1746±692mL (p=0.27). The transfusion rates were also similar between the two groups, AA: 23.2% versus PA: 31.1% (p=0.31) as well as the duration of hospitalization, AA: 8.5±3.2 versus PA: 8.2±3.3 days (p=0.54). The operating time was shorter in the PA group (Δ=10.3±14.1minutes [p<0.001]) with a greater risk of early dislocation when the patient was operated on by PA with AA: 9.8% versus PA: 1.4% (p=0.03). CONCLUSION: This study does not demonstrate any influence of the approach (anterior or posterior) on total blood loss. Transfusion rates and length of hospitalization were similar between the groups with a slightly shorter operating time but a greater risk of early dislocations after posterior hemiarthroplasty in a population at high anesthesia-related risk. LEVEL OF PROOF: III, comparative study of continuous series.

Autophagy markers are decreased in bone of osteoporotic patients: a monocentric comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis (OP) is a pathology characterized by bone fragility affecting 30% of postmenopausal women, mainly due to estrogen deprivation and increased oxidative stress. An autophagy involvement is suspected in OP pathogenesis but a definitive proof in humans remains to be obtained. METHODS: Postmenopausal women hospitalized for femoral neck fracture (OP group) or total hip replacement (Control group) were enrolled using very strict exclusion criteria. Western blot was used to analyze autophagy level. RESULTS: The protein expression level of the autophagosome marker LC3-II was significantly decreased in bone of OP patients relative to the control group. In addition, the protein expression of the hormonally upregulated neu-associated kinase (HUNK), which is upregulated by female hormones and promotes autophagy, was also significantly reduced in bone of the OP group. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate for the first time that postmenopausal OP patients have a deficit in bone autophagy level and suggest that HUNK could be the factor linking estrogen loss and autophagy decline. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03175874, 2/6/2017.

Can hip function be assessed with self-report questionnaires? Feasibility study of a French self-report version of the Harris Hip and Merle d'Aubigné scores.

INTRODUCTION: The Harris Hip Score (HHS) and the Merle D'Aubigné Postel (MDP) score both provide an objective and subjective evaluation of hip function. These scores are collected during the follow-up of patients who have a hip disease. The objectives of this prospective study were (1) to analyze the differences between the two new French self-report versions of the HHS and MDP, and the traditional surgeon-assessed HHS and MDP; (2) to analyze the correlation between the self-report HHS and MDP and the surgeon-assessed HHS and MDP; (3) to analyze the floor and ceiling effects of the two self-report scores and the reliability of these self-report scores in operated and non-operated patients. HYPOTHESIS: The French self-report HHS and MDP are sufficiently reliable to accurately estimate the patient's objective and subjective outcomes compared to the clinical examination done by a surgeon. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study was done with patients who had a hip disease. Two self-report questionnaires were completed by the patient, independently of the clinical examination done by the surgeon. The questionnaires were in French and consisted solely of checkboxes, with sample photos that corresponded to the various range of motion items in the HHS and MDP. The agreement between the self-report scores and the surgeon-assessed scores were evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Differences in the mean values were evaluated with a paired t test. RESULTS: The analysis involved 89 patients. The self-report HHS was 2.7±3.7 points (/100) lower than the surgeon-assessed HHS, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.34). The self-report MDP was significantly less by 1.2±2.9 points (/18) than the surgeon-assessed MDP (p=0.01). The agreement between the self-report HSS and the surgeon-assessed HSS was excellent (ICC=0.86) as was the one between the self-report MDP and the surgeon-assessed MDP (ICC=0.75). There was a strong positive correlation between the surgeon-assessed and self-report HHS in operated patients (ICC= 0.84; R=0.75; p<0.001) and in non-operated patients (ICC=0.96; R=0.89; p<0.001). This positive correlation was also found between the surgeon-assessed and self-report MDP for operated patients (ICC=0.73; R=0.62; p<0.001) and non-operated patients (ICC=0.79; R=0.64; p<0.001). A ceiling effect (maximum of 100 points) was found in 22% of patients (20/89) for the self-report HHS and in 34% of patients (30/89) for the self-report MDP (maximum of 18 points). No floor effect was observed for either questionnaire. CONCLUSION: The French version of the HHS self-report questionnaire is an excellent overall estimator of the HHS score for patients with hip osteoarthritis or fracture, whether operated or not. The addition of the MDP, whose self-report version is less accurate, is also a reliable tool. These self-report questionnaires, when validated on a larger scale, will be useful for the long-term follow-up of patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; prospective diagnostic study.

Restoration of preoperative tibial alignment improves functional results after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: The alignment obtained after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) influences the risk of failure. Kinematic alignment after UKA based on Cartier angle restauration is likely to improve clinical outcomes compared with mechanical alignment. The purpose of this study is to analyze the influence of implant alignment and native knee restoration after UKA using the conventional techniques on clinical outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study included 144 medial UKA patients from 2015 to 2020. Radiographic measurements were performed pre- and postoperatively. Outliers were defined as follows: Δ Cartier > 3° (difference between the preoperative and postoperative Cartier angle); Δ MPTA (Medial Proximal Tibial angle) and postoperative TCA (Tibial Coronal component Angle) > 3° (difference between the positioning of the tibial implant and the preoperative proximal tibial deformity). The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Society (IKS) Function and Knee score, the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and the Subjective Knee Value (SKV) were evaluated. A Student t test or a non-parametric Wilcoxon test was used for non-normal data to compare pre- and postoperative values for functional scores and angular measurements. The correlation of postoperative angles with functional outcomes was assessed by the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. RESULTS: During the inclusion period, 214 patients underwent medial UKA, 71 patients were excluded, and 19 were lost to follow-up leaving 124 patients with 144 knees (20 bilateral UKA) included for analysis with a mean follow-up of 54.7 months ± 22.1 (24-95). The Δ Cartier was significantly correlated with IKS function (R2 = 0.06, p < 0.001) and FJS (R2 = 0.05, p < 0.01) scores. The Δ preoperative MPTA-TCA was significantly correlated (p < 0.001) with KOOS (R2 = 0.38), IKS Knee (R2 = 0.17), IKS function (R2 = 0.34), SKV (R2 = 0.08), and FJS (R2 = 0.37) scores. In subgroup analysis, non-outliers (< 3°) for Δ preoperative MPTA-TCA had better KOOS score (Δ = 23.5, p < 0.001) and IKS Function (Δ = 17.7, p < 0.001) compared to outliers (> 3°) patients. CONCLUSION: Functional results after medial UKA can be influenced by implant alignment in the coronal plane with slight clinical improvement when positioning the tibial implant close to the preoperative tibial deformity, rather than by restoring the Cartier angle. This series suggests the interest of a more personalized alignment strategy, but these results will have to be confirmed by other controlled studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective case series.

Normo-or slightly overcorrection show better results after medial closing wedge high tibial osteotomy.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to evaluate functional results, revision-free survival, and the influence of postoperative alignment on outcomes after MCWHTO. METHODS: This retrospective study included 27 MCWHTO operated on from 2009 to 2021. Radiographic measurements were performed pre- and postoperatively. The HKA (Hip-Knee-Ankle angle), MPTA (Medial Proximal Tibial angle), LDFA (Lateral Distal Femoral Angle), JLO (Joint Line Obliquity), and JLCA (Joint Line Convergence Angle) were evaluated. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Society (IKS) Function and Knee Score, and the Subjective Knee Value (SKV) as well as revision-free survival were evaluated. Postoperative alignment and its influence on clinical outcomes were also analysed. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 61.9 months ± 31.4 (13-124). The HKA, MPTA, and JLCA angles were decreased post-operatively (respectively, Δ = 5.9° ± 2.6, p < 0.001; Δ = 6.1° ± 3.2, p < 0.001 and Δ = 2.5° ± 1.9, p < 0.001). LDFA and JLO were unchanged, post-operatively (respectively, Δ = 0.1° ± 2.2, p = 0.93 and Δ = 1.2° ± 3.3, p = 0.23). Postoperative HKA correlated with knee IKS (R = - 0.15, p = 0.04) and function IKS (R = - 0.44, p = 0.03). Postoperative LDFA correlated with knee IKS(R = 0.8, p < 0.01). Patients with postoperative HKA ≤ 180° had better KOOS (Δ = 12.3, p = 0.04) and IKS function (Δ = 28.1, p < 0.01) than those with HKA > 180°. CONCLUSION: Functional results and revision-free survival after MCWHTO are satisfactory when the deformity is located in the proximal tibia. The joint line obliquity is not significantly altered with small tibial correction and, obtaining an overall neutral or slightly varus alignment under the conditions of this study allowed an improvement in the postoperative clinical scores. The literature is still inconclusive on the ideal alignment for valgus deformities and larger series are needed to draw definitive conclusions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.

Effectiveness of Geniculate Artery Embolization for Chronic Pain after Total Knee Replacement-A Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of embolization of hyperemic synovial tissue for the treatment of persistent pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve patients with persistent pain after TKA were enrolled in this prospective, single-center pilot study. Genicular artery embolization (GAE) was performed using 75-µm spherical particles. The patients were assessed using a 100-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at baseline and 3 and 6 months thereafter. Adverse events were recorded at all time points. RESULTS: A mean of 1.8 ± 0.8 abnormal hyperemic genicular arteries were identified and embolized, with a median volume of diluted embolic material of 4.3 mL in all 12 (100%) patients. The mean VAS score on walking improved from 73 ± 16 at baseline to 38 ± 35 at the 6-month follow-up (P < .05). The mean KOOS pain score improved from 43.6 ± 15.5 at baseline to 64.6 ± 27.1 at the 6-month follow-up (P < .05). At the 6-month follow-up, 55% and 73% of the patients attained a minimal clinically important change in pain and quality of life, respectively. Self-limited skin discoloration occurred in 5 (42%) patients. The VAS score increased by more than 20 immediately after embolization in 4 (30%) patients, who required analgesic treatment for 1 week. CONCLUSION: GAE is a safe method of treating persistent pain after TKA that demonstrates potential efficacy at 12 months.

Comparative study of bilateral total hip arthroplasty in one or two stages.

INTRODUCTION: Bilateral total hip arthroplasty (Bi THA) for disabling bilateral hip osteoarthritis can be performed in one or two operative sessions. The objective of this study was to compare the complication rates of a group of patients who had bilateral THA in one operating session (Bi-1S THA) to a matched group of patients who had bilateral THA in two separate operating sessions (Bi-2S THA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective case-control study compared 84 Bi-1S THA matched to 84 Bi-2S THA by age, gender, diagnosis, ASA score (1-2) and surgical approach. The minimum follow-up was 12 months. Complication rates, total blood loss, number of blood transfusion units, and functional outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Twelve patients (14.3%) in the Bi-1S THA group had minor or major complications, compared to twenty-one (25%) in the Bi-2S THA group (p=0.08): there were fewer minor complications in the Bi-1S THA group and a similar rate of major complications amongst the two groups. Total blood loss estimated using the OSTHEO formula was significantly lower in patients operated on by Bi-1S THA (1853±753mL versus 2804±1012mL, p <0.0001). The number of blood transfusion units was similar between the groups (0.5±0.8 versus 0.3±1.4 respectively, p=0.55). No significant difference was found regarding the functional results. CONCLUSION: Under the conditions of this study, bilateral total hip arthroplasty in one operative session leads to fewer minor complications, and a similar rate of major complications, when compared to bilateral total hip arthroplasty in two separate sessions. This strategy can therefore be recommended for ASA 1 and 2 patients, under the age of 80 with disabling bilateral osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative study.

Early morbidity and mortality after one-stage bilateral THA: Anterior versus posterior approach.

BACKGROUND: Advantages of performing bilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) in one stage include a single hospital stay, a single exposure to anaesthesia risks, and expedited rehabilitation. Controversy persists however, regarding safety, notably morbidity and mortality rates. Importantly, few studies have compared the anterior to the posterior approach for single-stage bilateral THA (1B-THA). The objective of this retrospective study in a uniform patient population was to compare the anterior and posterior approaches for 1B-THA in terms of: 1) early mortality rates, 2) early complications, 3) and 90-day re-admission rates, hospital stay lengths, and blood loss. HYPOTHESIS: 1B-THA in patients younger than 80 years who have an ASA score of 1 or 2 is associated with no early mortality and with low early morbidity rates regardless of whether the anterior or posterior approach is used. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A single-centre retrospective comparative design was used to assess 90-day mortality and morbidity rates in consecutive patients who underwent 1B-THA between 2004 and 2018. The groups managed with the anterior approach (AA) without traction table and posterior approach (PA) were compared. The ASA score was ≤2 and age ≤80 years in all patients. The groups were comparable for age, sex distribution, ASA score, pre-operative haemoglobin level, and reason for THA. RESULTS: We included 55 patients managed via the AA and 82 managed via the PA. No patients died in either group. Early complications occurred in 3 patients in the AA group and 6 in the AP group (p=0.74). No differences were noted between the two groups for each type of complication. In the AA group, 3 patients experienced major complications (p=0.06) (2 cerebrovascular events and 1 peri-prosthetic fracture). In the PA group, 6 patients experienced minor complications (1 case each of dislocation, piriformis syndrome, sacral pressure sore, and deep vein thrombosis and 2 cases of ilio-psoas irritation; p=0.08). Operative time was 144minutes (range, 110-195minutes) in the AA group and 171minutes (range, 108-255minutes) in the PA group (p<0.001). Mean hospital stay length was 7.6 days (range, 3-13 days) overall, 6.7 days (range, 5-11 days) in the AA group, and 8.2 days (range, 3-13 days) in the PA group (p<0.001). The early re-admission rate was 2.9% overall, with no difference between the AA group (3.6% [2/55]) and the PA group (2.4% [2/82]) A post-operative blood transfusion was required by 34/137 (24.8%) patients overall, 15/55(27.3%) patients in the AA group and 19/82 (23.2%) patients in the PA group (p=0.58). DISCUSSION: In selected patients (ASA score 1 or 2 and age ≤80 years), 1B-THA was not followed by any early deaths in the patients managed using the anterior or posterior approach. Total early morbidity rates were low. Neither the types of complications nor the early re-admission rates differed between the AA and PA groups. The shorter operative time in the AA group is ascribable to change in patient installation between the two arthroplasties when the PA is used. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, comparative study of consecutive patients.