A Comparison of Wound Complications Following Total Hip Arthroplasty Performed Through the Direct Anterior Versus Direct Lateral Approach.

Background: Some studies have suggested the risk of wound complications may be higher using the direct anterior (DA) approach to total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to compare the risk of early postoperative wound complications between the DA and direct lateral (DL) approaches to THA and to determine patient risk factors that may contribute to this problem. Methods: All patients who underwent primary THA with a single surgeon over a 5-year period were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were treated with either the DA or DL approach. Data collected included patient demographics, surgical approach, and wound status. There was a minimum follow-up of 6 weeks to allow for an adequate assessment of surgical wound healing. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the 2 approaches. Results: Five hundred seventy-nine patients (77.6%) who underwent DA approach and 167 patients (22.4%) who underwent DL approach were included. Patients who underwent DL approach had a higher body mass index and a higher rate of diabetes than those treated with the DA approach. Forty patients (6.9%) in the DA cohort and 14 (8.4%) in the DL cohort experienced early wound complications, P = .523. After controlling for potential confounding variables, the surgical approach was not an independent risk factor for early postoperative wound complications. Conclusions: While there have been concerns regarding use of the DA approach in patients with higher body mass index and certain medical comorbidities, the results of this study suggest the choice of surgical approach may have minimal effect on the rate of early postoperative wound complications.

Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) and Bard: Artificial Intelligence Does not yet Provide Clinically Supported Answers for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have led to the creation of large language models (LLMs), such as Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) and Bard, that analyze online resources to synthesize responses to user queries. Despite their popularity, the accuracy of LLM responses to medical questions remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the responses of ChatGPT and Bard regarding treatments for hip and knee osteoarthritis with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) recommendations. METHODS: Both ChatGPT (Open AI) and Bard (Google) were queried regarding 20 treatments (10 for hip and 10 for knee osteoarthritis) from the AAOS CPGs. Responses were classified by 2 reviewers as being in "Concordance," "Discordance," or "No Concordance" with AAOS CPGs. A Cohen's Kappa coefficient was used to assess inter-rater reliability, and Chi-squared analyses were used to compare responses between LLMs. RESULTS: Overall, ChatGPT and Bard provided responses that were concordant with the AAOS CPGs for 16 (80%) and 12 (60%) treatments, respectively. Notably, ChatGPT and Bard encouraged the use of non-recommended treatments in 30% and 60% of queries, respectively. There were no differences in performance when evaluating by joint or by recommended versus non-recommended treatments. Studies were referenced in 6 (30%) of the Bard responses and none (0%) of the ChatGPT responses. Of the 6 Bard responses, studies could only be identified for 1 (16.7%). Of the remaining, 2 (33.3%) responses cited studies in journals that did not exist, 2 (33.3%) cited studies that could not be found with the information given, and 1 (16.7%) provided links to unrelated studies. CONCLUSIONS: Both ChatGPT and Bard do not consistently provide responses that align with the AAOS CPGs. Consequently, physicians and patients should temper expectations on the guidance AI platforms can currently provide.

Extended Prophylactic Antibiotics for Primary and Aseptic Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in extended antibiotic prophylaxis (EAP) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA); however, the benefit of EAP remains controversial. For this investigation, both oral and intravenous antibiotic protocols were included in the EAP group. METHODS: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Ovid Embase, Elton B. Stephens CO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were queried for literature comparing outcomes of primary and aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who were treated with either ≤24 hours of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (standard of care [SoC]) or >24 hours of EAP. The primary outcome was periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). A pooled relative-risk random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model was implemented to compare cohorts. RESULTS: There were 18 studies with a total of 19,153 patients included. There was considerable variation in antibiotic prophylaxis protocols with first-generation cephalosporins being the most commonly implemented antibiotic for both groups. Patients treated with EAP were 35% less likely to develop PJI relative to the SoC (P = .0004). When examining primary TJA, patients treated with EAP were 39% and 40% less likely to develop a PJI for TJA (P = .0008) and THA (P = .02), respectively. There was no significant difference for primary TKA (P = .17). When examining aseptic revision TJA, EAP led to a 36% and 47% reduction in the probability of a PJI for aseptic revision TJA (P = .007) and aseptic revision TKA (P = .008), respectively; there was no observed benefit for aseptic revision THA (P = .36). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated that patients treated with EAP were less likely to develop a PJI relative to those treated with the SoC for all TJA, primary TJA, primary THA, aseptic revision TJA, and aseptic revision TKA. There was no significant difference observed between EAP and SoC for primary TKA or aseptic revision THA.

A meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes of patients with and without chronic hepatitis C undergoing primary total hip or knee arthroplasty.

Purpose: This investigation provides a rigorous systematic review of the postoperative outcomes of patients with and without chronic hepatitis C who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: We queried PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science and the 'gray' literature, including supplemental materials, conference abstracts and proceedings as well as commentary published in various peer-reviewed journals from 1992 to present to evaluate studies that compared the postoperative outcomes of patients with and without chronic hepatitis C who underwent primary THA or TKA. This investigation was registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews and follows the guidelines provided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. In our literature search, we identified 14 articles that met our inclusion criteria and were included in our fixed-effects meta-analysis. The postoperative outcomes analyzed included periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), aseptic revision, non-homebound discharge and inpatient mortality. Results: Our statistical analysis demonstrated a statistically significant increase in postoperative complications of patients with chronic hepatitis C who underwent primary THA or TKA including PJI (odds ratio (OR): 1.98, 95% CI: 1.86 - 2.10), aseptic revision (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.50 - 1.67), non-homebound discharge (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.28- 1.34) and inpatient mortality (OR: 9.37, 95% CI: 8.17 - 10.75). Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant increase in adverse postoperative complications in patients with chronic hepatitis C who underwent primary THA or TKA compared to patients without chronic hepatitis C.

Routine Indwelling Urinary Catheterization Is Not Necessary During Total Hip Arthroplasty Performed Under Spinal Anesthesia.

Background: Perioperative indwelling urinary catheterization remains common in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. This study sought to examine the effect of routine catheterization following total hip arthroplasty performed under spinal anesthesia on urinary complications. Methods: A total of 991 consecutive patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia over a 4-year period were retrospectively reviewed. Major postoperative urinary retention (POUR) was defined as persistent retention following 2 straight catheterizations, which required postoperative indwelling catheter placement. Minor POUR was defined as retention that resolved following 1 or 2 straight catheterizations. Statistical analyses were used to compare outcomes between those who received a routine indwelling catheter and those who did not. Results: Of the 991 patients included, 498 (50.3%) underwent routine indwelling urinary catheter placement preoperatively. Routine indwelling catheterization was associated with a higher rate of urinary tract infection (1.4% vs 0.0%, P = .015), but a lower rate of minor POUR (5.0% vs 10.3%, P = .001). There was no difference with respect to the rate of major POUR or discharge with an indwelling catheter. Multivariate analyses demonstrated indwelling catheterization to be independently associated with a lower rate of minor POUR (P = .021), but there was no association with overall POUR, major POUR, or discharge with a urinary catheter. Conclusion: These data suggest that routine indwelling urinary catheterization is likely unnecessary for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty in the setting of spinal anesthetic and may even lead to increased risk of complications such as urinary tract infection.

Intra-abdominal migration of a k-wire during revision total hip arthroplasty.

Revision total hip arthroplasty in the setting of severe acetabular bone loss is a challenging problem that is becoming more common. Kirschner wires are often used during acetabular revision for temporary fixation of trial components. We describe an intraoperative migration of a Kirschner wire through the acetabulum into the peritoneal cavity, requiring acute laparoscopic removal.

Formal Physical Therapy After Total Hip Arthroplasty Is Not Required: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The value of formal physical therapy after total hip arthroplasty is unknown. With substantial changes that have occurred in surgical and anesthesia techniques, self-directed therapy may be efficacious in restoring function to patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, randomized trial of 120 patients undergoing primary, unilateral total hip arthroplasty who were eligible for direct home discharge. The experimental group followed a self-directed home exercise program for 10 weeks. The control group received the standard protocol for physical therapy that included in-home visits with a physical therapist for the first 2 weeks followed by formal outpatient physical therapy for 8 weeks. Functional outcomes were measured using validated instruments including the Harris hip score (HHS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) preoperatively, at 1 month postoperatively, and at 6 to 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 120 randomized patients, 108 were included in the final analysis. Ten patients (19%) were randomized to unsupervised home exercise and 20 patients (37%) were randomized to formal outpatient therapy crossed over between groups. There was no significant difference in any of the measured functional outcomes between patients receiving formal therapy (n = 54) and those participating in unsupervised home exercise (n = 54) at any time point (HHS, p = 0.82; WOMAC, p = 0.80; and SF-36 physical health, p = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial suggests that unsupervised home exercise is both safe and efficacious for a majority of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty, and formal physical therapy may not be required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.