Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma as an Adjuvant to Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Reduces the Retear Rate But Does Not Improve Functional Outcomes: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether the use of PRP as an adjuvant of rotator cuff repairs leads to improved tendon healing and better functional outcomes remains unclear in clinical evidence. PURPOSE: The main purpose of this study was to assess whether the use of leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) as an adjuvant to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) decreases the rate of retears compared with a control group. The secondary objective was to analyze whether LP-PRP improves patient-reported outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: This was a double-blind randomized controlled trial at a single center. A consecutive series of 96 patients with rotator cuff tears <3 cm were enrolled and randomly allocated to the control group (double-row suture-bridge ARCR alone [n = 48]) and the PRP group (double-row suture-bridge repair, followed by 1 LP-PRP injection during surgery [n = 48]). The visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were administered preoperatively and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed to evaluate tendon integrity at 6-month follow-up. Both patients and assessors were blinded to the intervention received during surgery. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 56.1 ± 2.98 years. Of the 96 patients, 90 had MRI performed at 6 months after surgery (94% radiological follow-up). The retear rate in the PRP group was 15.2% (7/46 [95% CI, 6%-28%]), which was lower than that in the control group of 34.1% (15/44 [95% CI, 20%-49%]) (P = .037). Therefore, the risk ratio of ruptures in patients exposed to LP-PRP was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.2-0.9; P = .037). Overall, the ASES, VAS, SANE, and PSQI scores showed a statistical improvement after surgery (P < .001). There were no significant differences in functional scores between the groups. Most of the patients exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for the ASES, SANE, and VAS without significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with rotator cuff tears <3 cm undergoing double-row suture-bridge repair, a 5-mL dose of LP-PRP injected at the tendon-bone interface significantly reduced the retear rate. However, the use of LP-PRP in terms of postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes failed to show clinically meaningful effects. REGISTRATION: NCT04703998 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Trends in prevalence and complications for smokers who underwent total hip arthroplasty from 2011 to 2019: an analysis of 243,163 patients.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is an established risk factor for postoperative complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is unknown if the decreasing prevalence of adult smoking in the United States is reflected in the elective THA patient population. We aimed to investigate recent trends in: (1) the prevalence of smoking pre-THA, stratified by patient demographics; and (2) rates of 30-day complications and increased healthcare utilisation post-THA in smokers versus non-smokers. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary elective THA (2011-2019) were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. A total of 243,163 cases (Smokers: n = 30,536; Non-smokers: n = 212,627) were included. Trends analyses were performed for smoking prevalence across the study period. Smokers were propensity score-matched (1:1) to a cohort of non-smokers (n = 29,628, each), and rates of 30-day complications, readmission, and non-home discharge were compared. RESULTS: The rate of preoperative smoking significantly decreased from 14.0% in 2011 to 11.6% in 2019 (p-trend = 0.0286). When stratified, a significant decreasing trend in smoking was found for males and all races; within races, American-Indian/Alaska-Native race had the sharpest decline (2011:36.3% vs. 2019:23.2%). No significant change in 30-day complication rates among smokers or non-smokers was observed (p-trend > 0.05), but non-home discharge significantly decreased for both smokers (p-trend = 0.001) and non-smokers (p-trend < 0.001). After matching, higher rates of superficial surgical site infections (SSI) (0.9% vs. 0.5%; p < 0.001), deep SSI (0.5% vs. 0.3%; p < 0.001), wound disruption (0.2% vs. 0.1%; p = 0.006), and readmission (4.2% vs. 3.1%; p = <0.001) were found in smokers versus non-smokers. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is encouraging that national efforts to reduce the prevalence of smoking may be successful within the THA population, but there is a persistently elevated risk of postoperative complications in smokers after THA.

High social media attention scores are not reflective of study quality: an altmetrics-based content analysis.

Recent literature has demonstrated the associations between social media attention, as measured by altmetric attention score (AAS), and higher citation rates across medical disciplines. Despite increasing use of AAS, an understanding of factors associated with higher AAS and social media attention remains lacking. Furthermore, if this increased attention correlates with a higher methodological quality and lower biases has not been determined. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to determine the relationship between methodological quality, study biases and the AAS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). All RCTs from 2016 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Society (JAMA), and Lancet were extracted and the (1) AAS; (2) Methodological Bias (JADAD Scale); Study Bias (Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for RCTs) recorded. A total of 296 RCTs with a median (range) AAS and citation rate per article of 234.0(7-4079) and 165.0(4-3257), respectively, were included. The AAS was positively associated with citation rate (ß 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.29; P < 0.001). Methodological bias was not associated with the AAS (ß - 36.3, 95% CI - 83.5-10.9; P = 0.131), but was negatively associated with higher citation rates (ß - 66.4, 95% CI - 106.0 to - 26.9; P = 0.001). The number of study biases was not associated with the AAS (ß 43.7, 95% CI - 6.3-93.7;P = 0.086), but was positively associated with a higher citation rate (ß 64.5, 95% CI 22.4-106.6; P = 0.003). The online attention of RCTs in medical journals was not necessarily reflective of high methodological quality and minimal study biases, but was associated with higher citation rates. Researchers and clinicians should critically examine each article despite the amount of online attention an article receives as the AAS does not necessarily reflect article quality.

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Background: The indication of prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures for non-infected causes in order to reduce the risk of haematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains as controversial. We performed a systematic review of the literature assessing the relationship between PJI and invasive dental procedures and whether there is evidence to support the use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for studies focusing on dental procedures after TJA, reporting on PJI as an outcome. The methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case-control and cohort studies and by the tool proposed by Murad et al. for observational studies. Results: Our systematic literature review yielded 90 individual studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. The overall infection rate ranged from 0.26% to 2.12%. Of these, cases associated with a dental procedure ranged from 0% to 15.9%. Five of the studies described cases in which antibiotic prophylaxis was administered; however, no clear algorithm regarding type and dosage of antibiotic was mentioned. When assessing the methodological quality of the evidence, all studies had an overall low to moderate quality. Conclusion: The current systematic review, mostly composed of low-quality studies, suggests that there is no direct evidence to indicate prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures in patients with TJA. In line with the current guidelines, no prophylaxis should be used on interventions for non-infected causes, except for occasional unusual situations, which can then be judged individually.