Gloves Contamination During Revision Surgery for Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: The use of double gloving has become a standard practice for joint replacement surgeons. However, since there are limited data on how gloves are contaminated during both primary and revision arthroplasty, no precise protocol exists to direct surgeons on when, or if, to change their gloves. The goals of this preliminary study were to evaluate the contamination of gloves during total joint arthroplasties (TJAs). METHODS: We included 25 infected cases and 10 primaries, which were performed at the same institution using the same surgical protocol from 3 fellowship trained surgeons. Samples were taken every 20 minutes from the start of the surgery until the joint was irrigated. Procedural steps were noted. To evaluate cross-contamination during infected cases, we sampled gloves using blood agar plates. In primary cases, culture swabs of anterior chamfer cuts and sterile instruments on the back table were used as negative controls. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was used as an adjunct to identify low virulence bacteria. RESULTS: In the primary cases, all samples were found culture negative but 3 (8.1%) of the 37 samples were found to have a low, unidentifiable bacterial mass via NGS testing. In the infected cases, 41 (59.4%) of the 69 samples yielded positive microbial results. The positivity rate was higher in the samples collected after the arthrotomy was performed (70%) compared to samples collected before the arthrotomy was performed (40%), and the surgeon was only dissecting superficial layers (P = .502). CONCLUSION: Gloves seem to be a common source of cross-contamination in the intraoperative field during revision TJA. Due to the higher percent of positive samples following the opening of the joint, we hypothesize that the arthrotomy allows for the spread of bacteria across the operative site. While further investigation is necessary to formulate a precise protocol for the changing of gloves during TJA, it may be beneficial to perform a thorough irrigation of the joint and change of the gloves immediately following arthrotomy.

Risk Adjustment Is Necessary in Value-Based Payment Models for Arthroplasty for Oncology Patients.

BACKGROUND: Value-based payment models such as bundled payments have been introduced to reduce costs following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Concerns exist, however, about access to care for patients who utilize more resources. The purpose of this study is thus to compare resource utilization and outcomes of patients undergoing THA for malignancy with those undergoing THA for fracture or osteoarthritis. METHODS: We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify all hip arthroplasties performed from 2013 to 2016 for a primary diagnosis of malignancy (n = 296), osteoarthritis (n = 96,480), and fracture (n = 13,406). The rates of readmissions, reoperations, comorbidities, mortality, and surgical characteristics were compared between the 3 cohorts. To control for confounding variables, a multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for resource utilization and outcomes following THA. RESULTS: Patients undergoing THA for malignancy had a longer mean operative time (155.7 vs 82.9 vs 91.0 minutes, P < .001), longer length of stay (9.0 vs 7.2 vs 2.6 days, P < .001), and were more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility (42.1% vs 61.8% vs 20.2%, P < .001) than patients with fracture or osteoarthritis. When controlling for demographics and comorbidities, patients undergoing THA for malignancy had a higher rate of readmission (adjusted odds ratio 3.39, P < .001) and reoperation (adjusted odds ratio 3.71, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing THA for malignancy utilize more resources in an episode-of-care and have worse outcomes. Risk adjustment is necessary for oncology patients in order to prevent access to care problems for these high-risk patients.

Can an arthroplasty risk score predict bundled care events after total joint arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: The validated Arthroplasty Risk Score (ARS) predicts the need for postoperative triage to an intensive care setting. We hypothesized that the ARS may also predict hospital length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and episode-of-care cost (EOCC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a series of 704 patients undergoing primary total hip and knee arthroplasty over 17 months. Patient characteristics, 90-day EOCC, LOS, and readmission rates were compared before and after ARS implementation. RESULTS: ARS implementation was associated with fewer patients going to a skilled nursing or rehabilitation facility after discharge (63% vs 74%, P = .002). There was no difference in LOS, EOCC, readmission rates, or complications. While the adoption of the ARS did not change the mean EOCC, ARS >3 was predictive of high EOCC outlier (odds ratio 2.65, 95% confidence interval 1.40-5.01, P = .003). Increased ARS correlated with increased EOCC (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the ARS was associated with increased disposition to home. It was predictive of high EOCC and should be considered in risk adjustment variables in alternative payment models.

Can Demographic Variables Accurately Predict Component Sizing in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: As health care reform drives providers to reduce costs and improve efficiencies without compromising patient care, preoperative planning has become imperative. The purpose of this study is to determine whether height, weight, and gender can accurately predict total knee arthroplasty (TKA) sizing. METHODS: A consecutive series of 3491 primary TKAs performed by 2 surgeons was reviewed. Height, weight, gender, implant, preoperative templating sizes, and final implant sizes were collected. Implant-specific dimensions were collected from vendors. Using height, weight, and gender, a multivariate linear regression was performed with and without the inclusion of preoperative templating. Accuracy of the model was reported for commonly used implants. RESULTS: There was a significant linear correlation between height, weight, and gender for femoral (R2 = 0.504; P < .001) and tibial sizes (R2 = 0.610; P < .001). Adding preoperative templating to the regression analysis increased the overall model fit for both the femoral (R2 = 0.756; P < .001) and tibial sizes (R2 = 0.780; P < .001). Femoral and tibial sizes were accurately predicted within 1 size of the final implant 71%-92% and 81%-97% using demographics alone or 85%-99% and 90%-99% using both templating and demographics, respectively. CONCLUSION: This novel TKA templating model allows final implants to be predicted to within 1 size. The model allows for simplified preoperative planning and potential implementation into a cost-savings program that limits inventory and trays required for each case.

Clinical indications for repeat MRI in children with acute hematogenous osteomyelitis.

BACKGROUND: At our center and at others, some children with acute hematogenous osteomyelitis (AHO) are evaluated with multiple magnetic resonance imagings (MRIs) during their treatment. Do these serial MRI studies have a role in the management of AHO? We examine several clinical indications for ordering a repeat MRI and whether the imaging study resulted in a change in management. METHODS: A total of 59 children (60 cases) with AHO were imaged with more than 1 MRI. We retrospectively reviewed the MRI studies and hospital records to investigate whether the results of the MRIs prompted a change in clinical management (surgical exploration or drainage, biopsy, change in the course of antibiotics). We investigated several clinical indicators including C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, time since index study, anatomic location of infection, and blood cultures. Differences in the proportion of patients with specified clinical characteristics, whose repeat MRI resulted in a change in management, were assessed by the use of χ² analysis. RESULTS: The median age of our patient population was 8.4 years; a total of 104 repeat MRI studies were undertaken on 59 children. Eleven (10.6%) of these studies prompted a change in patient treatment. Statistically significant indications for repeat MRI in changing clinical management included failure to improve clinically in 10 studies (21%, P<0.001), persistently elevated or increasing CRP levels in 11 MRI studies (52%, P<0.001), and the repeat study occurring within 14 days of the diagnostic MRI in 8 studies (29%, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study showed that additional MRI studies provide information that affected patient management in only a limited number of cases. Although repeat MRI does not have a role in routine surveillance in children with AHO undergoing treatment, it can be a useful adjunct to clinical evaluation in patients who do not respond to therapy or who have a persistently elevated CRP level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Therapeutic Study.