The preoperative management of Hepatitis C may improve the outcome after total knee arthroplasty.

AIMS: With an ageing population of patients who are infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV), the demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in this high-risk group continues to grow. It has previously been shown that HCV infection predisposes to poor outcomes following TKA. However, there is little information about the outcome of TKA in patients with HCV who have been treated successfully. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of TKA in untreated HCV patients and those with HCV who have been successfully treated and have a serologically confirmed remission. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with HCV who underwent primary TKA between November 2011 and April 2018 was conducted. HCV patients were divided into two groups: 1) those whose HCV was cured (HCV-C); and 2) those in whom it was untreated (HCV-UT). All variables including demographics, HCV infection characteristics, surgical details, and postoperative medical and surgical outcomes were evaluated. There were 64 patients (70 TKAs) in the HCV-C group and 63 patients (71 TKAs) in the HCV-UT cohort. The mean age at the time of surgery was 63.0 years (sd 7.5; 44 to 79) in the HCV-C group and 61.7 years (sd 6.9; 47 to 88) in the HCV-UT group. RESULTS: HCV-UT patients had a significantly longer mean hospital stay (3.4 days vs 2.9 days; p = 0.04), were more likely to be transferred to the intensive care unit (14.1% vs 4.3%; p = 0.04), and were significantly more often discharged to a post-acute care facility (39.4% vs 14.3%; p < 0.01). HCV-UT patients had significantly more postoperative infections (15.5% vs 4.3%; p = 0.03), surgical complications (21.1% vs 7.1%; p = 0.02), and revision TKA (12.7% vs 1.4%; p < 0.01) than HCV-C patients. CONCLUSION: The preoperative treatment of HCV can reduce the risk of complications, including prosthetic joint infection and revision TKA. We recommend that HCV treatment regimens should be integrated into the preoperative optimization protocol for this high-risk group of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:667-674.

A dedicated revision total knee service: a surgeon's perspective.

AIMS: Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) accounts for approximately 5% to 10% of all TKAs. Although the complexity of these procedures is well recognized, few investigators have evaluated the cost and value-added with the implementation of a dedicated revision arthroplasty service. The aim of the present study is to compare and contrast surgeon productivity in several differing models of activity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients that underwent primary or revision TKA from January 2016 to June 2018 were included as the primary source of data. All rTKA patients were categorized by the number of components revised (e.g. liner exchange, two or more components). Three models were used to assess the potential surgical productivity of a dedicated rTKA service : 1) work relative value unit (RVU) versus mean surgical time; 2) primary TKA with a single operating theatre (OT) versus rTKA with a single OT; and 3) primary TKA with two OTs versus rTKA with a single OT. RESULTS: In total, 4570 procedures were performed: 4128 primary TKAs, 51 TKA liner exchanges, and 391 full rTKAs. Surgical time was significantly different between the primary TKA, liner exchange, and rTKA cohorts (100.6, 97.1, and 141.7 minutes, respectively; p < 0.001). Primary TKA yielded a mean of 7.1% more RVU/min per procedure than rTKA. Our one-OT model demonstrated that primary TKA (n = 4) had a 1.9% RVU/day advantage over rTKA (n = 3). If two OTs are used for primary TKA (n = 6), the outcome strongly favours primary TKA by an added 34.6% RVUs/day. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that a dedicated rTKA service would lead to lower surgeon remuneration based on the current RVU paradigm. Revision arthroplasty specialists may need additional or alternative incentives to promote the development of a dedicated revision service. Through such an approach, healthcare organizations could enhance the quality of care provided, but surgeon productivity measures would need to be adjusted to reflect the burden of these cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:675-681.