Fatty Infiltration, Tear Size, and Retraction Size Are Significant Risk Factors for Retear following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To assess the consistency and quality of risk factor reporting for rotator cuff repair (RCR) retear and identify risk factors most frequently associated with retear. METHODS: A systematic review with PRISMA guidelines was performed. Of the initial 3,158 titles, a total of 31 studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical studies regarding RCR failure, (2) arthroscopic procedures involving RCR, (3) reporting clinical outcomes (4) performed within 5 years (5) and studies investigating pre-operative risk factors for retear. After full-text review, 18 risk factors were analyzed. RESULTS: The most consistently significant risk factors were acromiohumeral distance (AHD) (80%), critical shoulder angle (CSA) (67%), tear size (63%), anterior/posterior (AP) dimension (60%), fatty infiltration (FI, 58%), and retraction size (56%). FI was analyzed using different methods between studies with 63% finding significant results and 50% of all studies performing ordinal analysis. Tear size was inconsistently analyzed quantitatively or qualitatively, with 58% finding significant results and 63% of all studies analyzing quantitatively. Risk factors consistently found to be non-significant included age, sex, diabetes mellitus (DM), symptom duration, hand dominance, repair technique, smoking and body mass index (BMI). CONCLUSIONS: Tear size, fatty infiltration, and retraction size were found to be significant risk factors in the majority of included studies evaluating rotator cuff retear. Risk factors less likely reported as predictive included repair technique, age, sex, DM, symptom duration, hand dominance, repair technique, smoking, and BMI. Risk factors that require further investigation include CSA, AHD, and AP tear dimension. Level III, systematic review of Level III-V studies.

Effects of Delayed Hip Fracture Surgery on Severely Ill Patients: Defining the Time to Medical Optimization.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple comorbidities often have delayed hip fracture surgery due to medical optimization. The goal of this study is to identify the allowable time for medical optimization in severely ill hip fracture patients. METHODS: The 2016-2019 NSQIP database was used to identify patients over age 60 with ASA classification scores 3 and 4 for severe and life-threatening systemic diseases. Patients were divided into immediate (<24 hours), early (24-48 hours), or late (>48 hours) groups based on time to surgery (TTS). Risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to compare relationships between 30-day postoperative outcomes and TTS. RESULTS: 43,071 hip fracture cases were analyzed for the purposes of this study. Compared to patients who underwent surgery immediately, patients who had surgeries between 24 and 48 hours were associated with higher rates of pneumonia (OR 1.357, CI 1.194-1.542), UTIs (OR 1.155, CI 1.000-1.224), readmission (OR 1.136, CI 1.041-1.240), postoperative LOS beyond 6 days (OR 1.249, CI 1.165-1.340), and mortality (OR 1.205, CI 1.084-1.338). Patients with surgeries delayed beyond 48 hours were associated with higher rates of CVA (OR 1.542, CI 1.048-2.269), pneumonia (OR 1.886, CI 1.611-2.209), UTIs (OR 1.546, CI 1.283-1.861), readmission (OR 1.212, CI 1.074-1.366), postoperative LOS beyond 6 days (OR 1.829, CI 1.670-2.003), and mortality (OR 1.475, CI 1.286-1.693) compared to patients with immediate surgery. DISCUSSION: Severely ill patients with the hip fracture may have a 24-hour window for medical optimization. Hip fracture surgery performed beyond 48 hours is associated with higher complication rates and mortality among those who are severely ill. Further prospective studies are warranted to examine the effects of early surgical intervention among severely ill patients.

Trust but Verify: Discordance in Opioid Reporting Between the Electronic Medical Record and a Statewide Database.

INTRODUCTION: The electronic medical record (EMR) is often used as the primary source for patient medication lists and history. We sought to determine the accuracy of the EMR in documenting opioid prescriptions in patients undergoing fracture repair compared to a statewide database. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at an urban level 1 trauma center. Patients > 18 years old were included if they were admitted directly through the emergency room with isolated single orthopedic injuries. Opioid use and prescription data prior to admission and three months following surgery were collected through the EMR and a California statewide database of controlled substance prescriptions. A 2 x 2 McNemar's test was used to identify discordance between the EMR and Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES). RESULTS: A total of 369 patients were included. The EMR reported that 143 patients had an opioid prescription within 30 days prior to admission compared to 75 patients reported by CURES (discordance rate [DR]: 34.7%) (p < 0.001). Between postoperative days (POD) 0-30, the EMR reported that 367 patients had an opioid prescription compared to 285 reported by CURES (DR: 22.8%) (p < 0.001). Between POD 30-60, the EMR reported that 142 patients had an opioid prescription compared to 84 reported by CURES (DR: 34.7%) (p < 0.001). Between POD 60-90, the EMR reported that 83 patients had an active opioid prescription compared to 60 patients reported by CURES (DR: 41.0%) (p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: There is a significant discordance between the databases in documenting opioid use. Physicians should check multiple sources to best assess active opioid prescriptions.

Comparison of Extramedullary and Intramedullary Implants for Stable Intertrochanteric Fractures: Have We Swung the Pendulum Too Far the Other Way?

INTRODUCTION: Although intramedullary implants are commonly used to treat stable intertrochanteric (IT) fractures, there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate their superiority over extramedullary implants in treating these fractures. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term outcomes (<30 days) between intramedullary and extramedullary implants in patients with closed nondisplaced stable IT fractures. METHODS: Patients with closed nondisplaced stable IT fractures were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database between 2016 and 2019. Patients who either underwent extramedullary implant or intramedullary implant fixation were selected for this analysis. Postoperative outcomes included transfusion, surgical complications (stroke, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism, pneumonia, renal failure/insufficiency, surgical site infection, urinary tract infections, and sepsis), weight-bearing on postoperative day 1, discharge destination, place of residence at 30 days after the operation, days from operation to discharge, readmission related to the index procedure, any readmission, revision surgery, and mortality. RESULTS: Of the 3,244 cases identified for the study, 2,521 (77.7%) underwent intramedullary nailing (IMN). Based on adjusted multivariable analysis, surgical complications between the two intervention groups were not statistically significantly (odds ratio [OR] 1.142; confidence interval [CI], 0.838 to 1.558; P = 0.4). However, patients who underwent IMN were associated with higher rates of blood transfusions (OR, 1.35, CI, 1.042 to 1.748, P = 0.023), more likely discharged to a place other than home (OR, 1.372, CI, 1.106 to 1.700, P = 0.004), and more likely to get readmitted (OR, 1.783, CI, 1.157 to 2.75, P = 0.009). Patients treated with IMN were associated with lower postoperative length of stay (OR 0.982, CI 0.967 to 0.998, P = 0.030). DISCUSSION: Our study found that extramedullary implants were associated with lower transfusions rates, lower readmissions, and better patient disposition. We recommend surgeons to consider extramedullary implants when treating stable IT fractures, especially if the patient is anemic or at high risk for hospital readmission. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. Retrospective cohort study.

Clinical Outcomes and Surgical Complications Among Patients with Bleeding Disorders After Acute Hip Fracture Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare short-term (≤30 days) outcomes of hip fracture between patients with and without bleeding disorders. DESIGN: Retrospective database review. SETTING: The study setting included hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. PATIENTS: Patients with acute hip fractures were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database between 2016 and 2019. INTERVENTION: Open reduction internal fixation or hemiarthroplasty. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Mortality, readmission, reoperation, length of stay, and complication were main outcome measurements. RESULTS: There were 63,718 patients undergoing hip surgery, and 16.0% had a bleeding disorder. After adjusting for confounders, multivariable regression models showed that cases with bleeding disorders were associated with higher rates of transfusion [odds ratio (OR) 1.404; confidence interval (CI), 1.335-1.479], myocardial infarction (OR 1.367; CI, 1.190-1.572), pneumonia (OR 1.193; CI, 1.078-1.321), renal failure (OR 1.843; CI, 1.363-2.491), surgical site infections (OR 1.429; CI, 1.185-1.175), sepsis (OR 1.25; CI, 1.034-1.511), and readmission (OR 1.314; CI, 1.224-1.408). However, bleeding disorders were not associated with mortality (OR 0.947; CI, 0.866-1.036) or reoperation (OR 1.061; CI, 0.925-1.220). CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture surgery in patients with bleeding disorders is not associated with higher risks of short-term mortality or reoperation. However, special consideration should be taken when calculating preoperative risks of complications among bleeding disorder patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Evaluation of a novel C-Arm draping technique to minimize surgical field contamination and surgery time.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to compare the sterility of three C-Arm draping techniques: the clip-drape, sterile pouch, and a novel drape tower method. We hypothesize that our novel technique will minimize floor contamination from reaching the surgical field while allowing the C-Arm machine to rotate between lateral and anterior-posterior positions more quickly. METHODS: Five trials consisting of rotating the C-Arm and simulating surgeon movement were run using each technique. Ultraviolet light illuminating melamine powder was used to represent floor contamination. Measurements of melamine powder encroachment on the drapes were taken using the top of the C-Arm in lateral position as the reference point. The time needed to assemble, deploy, and retract the C-Arm was measured for each technique. The gown, gloves, and mayo stand were also examined after each trial for contamination. RESULTS: Compared to the clip drape, the drape tower prevented contamination from reaching the C-Arm by an additional 30.5 cm (95% confidence interval (CI): 17.0-43.9, P < 0.001). The drape tower had faster deployment and retraction times than both the clip drape (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) and sterile pouch (P = 0.011 and P < 0.001, respectively). The clip drape and sterile pouch exhibited glove contamination in two (40%) simulations, while the drape tower showed no instances of contamination (P = 0.255). CONCLUSIONS: The novel drape tower technique limits the encroachment of floor contamination onto sterile drapes. It should be considered as an alternative draping method for lower extremity surgery.