Association Between Preoperative Patient Resilience and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Rotator Cuff Repair.

Background: Mental and emotional health can affect outcomes after orthopaedic surgery, and patient resilience has been found to be significantly related to postoperative functional outcomes. Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between preoperative patient resilience and 2-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes after rotator cuff repair (RCR). It was hypothesized that patients with low preoperative resilience will have worse patient-reported outcomes at 2 years after RCR versus those with high resilience. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent primary arthroscopic RCR in 2020 at a single institution and completed the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) preoperatively were identified. Other inclusion criteria were American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores at the 2-year follow-up. Outcomes were compared in patients as divided into low resilience (BRS score >1 SD below the mean), normal resilience (BRS score ≤1 SD of the mean), and high resilience (BRS score >1 SD above the mean) groups. Results: Overall, 100 patients (52 male, 48 female; mean age, 60 ± 9 years) were included in this study. Mean BRS scores did not change significantly from preoperative to 2-year follow-up (3.8 ± 0.7 vs 3.9 ± 0.8, P = .404). All patients had preoperative ASES scores. Low-resilience patients (n = 17) had significantly lower preoperative ASES scores compared with normal (n = 64) and high resilience (n = 19) patients (35 vs 42 vs 54, respectively; P = .022). There were no significant group differences in postoperative outcomes (revision rate, ASES score, ASES score improvement from preoperative to 2-year follow-up, or SANE score). Multivariate analysis indicated that preoperative resilience was not significantly associated with ASES score improvement (ß estimate = -5.64, P = .150), while resilience at 2-year follow-up was significantly related to ASES score improvement (ß estimate = 6.41, P = .031). Conclusion: Patient-reported outcomes at 2-year follow-up did not differ based on preoperative patient resilience for arthroscopic RCR patients. Multivariate analysis also showed that preoperative resilience was not associated with improvement in ASES scores; however, resilience at 2-year follow-up was associated with ASES score improvement.

Beach Chair Versus Lateral Decubitus Surgical Positioning for Arthroscopic Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: A Retrospective Comparison of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Background: Surgical positioning can affect both perioperative and postoperative complication rates. It is unclear whether beach-chair versus lateral decubitus positioning affects outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization surgery. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare recurrent instability, complications, and patient-reported outcomes between patients who underwent arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization in the beach-chair versus the lateral decubitus positions. It was hypothesized that recurrent instability, complications, and patient-reported outcomes would not be affected by surgical positioning. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The authors reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent shoulder stabilization (Current Procedural Terminology codes 29806 and 29807) from 2015 to 2019. Patients were included only if anterior instability was confirmed, arthroscopic surgery was performed in response to shoulder instability, and a minimum of 2 years of follow-up data were available. Data collected for eligible patients included perioperative and postoperative complications, recurrent instability, reoperation, and revision. Patients also completed surveys for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, Oxford Shoulder Instability (OSI) score, and a return to any level of sport (RTS) questionnaire. Results: Overall, 294 patients (162 lateral decubitus and 132 beach-chair positions) were included, with an average follow-up of 2.4 ± 1.6 years. There were no significant differences in demographics between groups, nor were there differences in the rates of postoperative dislocations, subjective instability, reoperations, revisions, or complications. There was a trend toward a higher revision rate in the beach-chair group (beach-chair, 6.1% vs lateral decubitus, 1.9%; P = .069). There was no significant difference between groups regarding RTS rates or postoperative ASES, SANE, and OSI scores at 3.3 ± 1.1 years postoperatively. Conclusion: Surgical positioning for arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization did not significantly affect recurrent instability, complications, and patient-reported outcomes. Both beach-chair and lateral decubitus positioning provided good outcomes for anterior shoulder stabilization, with an overall recurrent dislocation rate of 7.8% at a mean of 3.3 years after surgery.

Beach-Chair Versus Lateral Decubitus Positioning for Arthroscopic Posterior Shoulder Labral Repair: A Retrospective Comparison of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Both beach-chair and lateral decubitus patient positioning are often utilized for shoulder arthroscopy, with each offering its unique advantages and disadvantages. The surgical position is often selected according to each surgeon's preference, with no clear superiority of one position over the other. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes between patients who underwent arthroscopic posterior labral repair in the beach-chair versus the lateral decubitus position. We hypothesized that patient positioning would not affect clinical and patient-reported outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A list of all patients diagnosed with the Current Procedural Terminology codes 29806 and 29807 between 2015 and 2019 was obtained from the medical records. Patients were only included if arthroscopic posterior labral repair with or without concomitant superior labral anterior to posterior repair was confirmed. Data collected for eligible patients included the number of anchors used, perioperative and postoperative complications, redislocations, subjective instability, reoperation, and revision. Patients were also contacted to complete several patient-reported outcome surveys. Preoperative data, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients who underwent surgery in the beach-chair versus lateral decubitus position. RESULTS: Overall, 126 patients were included-69 patients underwent surgery in the lateral decubitus position and 57 in the beach-chair position-with a mean follow-up of 2.6 ± 1.7 years. There were no significant pre- or perioperative differences between groups. Rates of postoperative dislocations, subjective instability, reoperations, revisions, all complications, and return to sports rates also did not differ between groups (all, P > .05). Finally, there was no difference between groups regarding postoperative pain, function, and subjective instability scores (all, P > .05). Results of the multivariate regression analysis showed that increased age was a weak independent risk factor for subjective recurrent posterior shoulder instability (odds ratio, 1.04; P = .036). CONCLUSION: Surgical positioning for arthroscopic posterior shoulder labral repair did not affect postoperative clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Both beach-chair and lateral decubitus position provided good outcomes for posterior shoulder labral repair, with an overall recurrence rate of 8.7%. Increased age was a weak independent risk factor for subjective recurrent instability.

For Patients With Acute PJI Treated With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention, What Factors Are Associated With Systemic Sepsis and Recurrent or Persistent Infection in Septic Patients?

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can lead to a severe systemic inflammatory response and may result in systemic sepsis. However, little is known about how often systemic sepsis may occur in patients with PJI, and whether sepsis is associated with a greater likelihood of persistent or recurrent PJI. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Among patients who present with acute or acute hematogenous PJI and who were treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), what proportion have sepsis and what factors are associated with a presentation with sepsis? (2) For patients presenting with sepsis, what factors are associated with persistent or recurrent PJI? METHODS: In all, 320 patients who underwent DAIR for the treatment of acute postoperative or acute hematogenous PJI between January 2000 and December 2019 were included in this study. Exclusion criteria were patients with other known sources of infection, such as pneumonia or urinary tract infections, which could contribute to systemic sepsis (6% [18 of 320]), patients with chronic PJI, and those with less than 6 months of follow-up (21% [66 of 320]). Our final cohort consisted of 236 patients presenting with an acute postoperative or acute hematogenous PJI who underwent an irrigation and debridement procedure. Sepsis was defined by the criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or bacteria-positive blood culture results. Inclusion of patients with positive blood culture by organisms that caused their joint infection was important as all patients presented with fulminant acute infection of a prosthetic joint. Data, including vital signs, surgical variables, and treatment outcomes, were collected retrospectively through a chart review of an electronic medical record system. The statistical analysis comparing patients with sepsis versus patients without sepsis consisted of logistic regression to identify factors associated with sepsis. After confirming its ability to identify patients with a higher association with the development of sepsis through area under the curve models, a nomogram was generated to standardize our results from the regression, which was supported by the area under the curve model, to help readers better identify patients who are more likely to develop sepsis. RESULTS: A total of 44% (103 of 236) of patients had infections that met the criteria for sepsis. After controlling for confounding variables, including congestive heart failure, anemia, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), and the male sex, it was revealed that serum CRP (odds ratio 1.07 [95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.11]; p < 0.001) and male sex (OR 1.96 [95% CI 1.03 to 3.81]; p = 0.04) were associated with the development of systemic sepsis. For patients presenting with sepsis, persistent or recurrent PJI were associated with an increased CRP level (OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.02 to 1.11]; p = 0.01) and number of prior surgical procedures on the joint (OR 2.30 [95% CI 1.21 to 4.89]; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings support that patients with systematic sepsis may benefit from two-stage revision rather than DAIR to decrease the bioburden more effectively, especially in those with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and polymicrobial infections. High serum CRP levels and a history of prior surgical procedures on the involved joint should trigger prompt, aggressive surgical treatment if the patient's overall clinical status can tolerate such an intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Aspirin Thromboprophylaxis Is Associated With Less Major Bleeding Events Following Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate on what is optimal prophylactic agent to reduce venous thromboembolism (VTE) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Although many studies assess the efficacy of these agents in VTE prevention, no attention is given to their adverse effect on major bleeding events (MBEs). This study compared the incidence of MBE in patients receiving aspirin as VTE prophylaxis vs other chemoprophylaxis. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective study of 35,860 patients undergoing TJA between 2009 and 2020 was conducted. Demographic variables, co-morbidities, type of chemoprophylaxis, and intraoperative factors were collected. MBE was defined using the 2010 criteria for major bleeding in surgical patients presented by the Scientific and Standardization Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. To enhance capture rate, comprehensive queries utilizing MBE keywords were conducted in clinical notes, physician dictations, and phone call logs. Univariate followed by multivariate regression was performed as well as propensity score matched analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 270 patients (0.75%) in this cohort developed MBE. The MBE rate was 0.5% in the aspirin group and 1.2% in the non-aspirin group. After adjusting for confounders, multiple logistic regression and propensity score matched analysis revealed almost 2 times lower odds of MBE in patients who received aspirin. Variables independently associated with increased MBE risk included increasing age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, revision surgery, peptic ulcer disease, coagulopathy, intraoperative blood transfusion, and active smoking. CONCLUSION: Administration of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis, compared to other chemoprophylaxis agents may have an association with lower risk of major bleeding following TJA. Future randomized controlled trials should examine these findings.

Thirty Days of Aspirin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Is Adequate Following Total Knee Arthroplasty, Regardless of the Dose Used.

BACKGROUND: The optimal length of aspirin prophylaxis to minimize venous thromboembolism (VTE) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the timing of VTE after TKA in patients who received low and high dose aspirin, and determine if 30 days of prophylaxis remains adequate. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of 9208 patients undergoing primary TKA between 2010 and 2020 who received either low (81 mg twice daily, n = 4413) or high (325 mg twice daily, n = 4795) dose aspirin for VTE prophylaxis. Symptomatic VTEs occurring within 90 days of surgery were identified from medical records and phone call logs. Major bleeding events (MBE) within the first 30 days were also documented. Time to event was recorded. RESULTS: Overall, 88 patients (1.0%) developed symptomatic VTE, with no significant differences in incidence between the low (n = 40, 0.9%) and high (n = 48, 1.0%) dose groups (P = .669). The median time to VTE was 8 days (interquartile range [IQR] 2-15.5), median time to deep vein thrombosis was 12 days (IQR 5-18), and median time to pulmonary embolism was 5 days (IQR 1.5-15). There was a similar distribution in time to VTE in both the low and high dose groups. Aside from a single DVT occurring at day 44, all VTE occurred within 30 days of surgery. During the prophylactic time period, 41 patients (0.4%) developed MBE, which tended to occur more frequently (0.6% vs 0.3%, P = .018) and earlier in the high dose group. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings, a 30-day low or high dose aspirin regimen remains optimal for prevention of VTE without increasing MBE in TKA patients.