Clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of robotic assisted versus conventional total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare important clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) and conventional total hip arthroplasty (COTHA) in patients with hip osteoarthritis. We identified published RCTs comparing RATHA with COTHA in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently performed study screening, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Main outcomes were major complications, revision, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and radiological outcomes. We included 8 RCTs involving 1014 patients and 977 hips. There was no difference in major complication rate (Relative Risk (RR) 0.78; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.22 to 2.74), revision rate (RR 1.33; 95%CI 0.08 to 22.74), and PROMs (standardized mean difference 0.01; 95%CI - 0.27 to 0.30) between RATHA and COTHA. RATHA resulted in little to no effects on femoral stem alignment (mean difference (MD) - 0.57 degree; 95%CI - 1.16 to 0.03) but yielded overall lower leg length discrepancy (MD - 4.04 mm; 95%CI - 7.08 to - 1.0) compared to COTHA. Most combined estimates had low certainty of evidence mainly due to risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Based on the current evidence, there is no important difference in clinical and functional outcomes between RATHA and COTHA. The trivial higher radiological accuracy was also unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Regardless, more robust evidence is needed to improve the quality and strength of the current evidence.PROSPERO registration: the protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023453294). All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Association Between Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Mortality Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a dreaded and unpredictable complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). In addition to causing substantial morbidity, PJI may contribute to long-term mortality risk. Our objective was to determine the long-term mortality risk associated with PJI following THA. METHODS: This population-based, retrospective cohort study included adult patients (≥18 years old) in Ontario, Canada, who underwent their first primary elective THA for arthritis between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2021. The primary outcome was death within 10 years after the index THA. Mortality was compared between propensity-score-matched groups (PJI within 1 year after surgery versus no PJI within 1 year after surgery) with use of survival analyses. Patients who died within 1 year after surgery were excluded to avoid immortal time bias. RESULTS: A total of 175,432 patients (95,883 [54.7%] women) with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 67 ± 11.4 years underwent primary THA during the study period. Of these, 868 patients (0.49%) underwent surgery for a PJI of the replaced joint within 1 year after the index procedure. After matching, patients with a PJI within the first year had a significantly higher 10-year mortality rate than their counterparts (11.4% [94 of 827 patients] versus 2.2% [18 of 827 patients]; absolute risk difference, 9.19% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6.81% to 11.6%]; hazard ratio, 5.49 [95% CI, 3.32 to 9.09]). CONCLUSIONS: PJI within 1 year after surgery is associated with over a fivefold increased risk of mortality within 10 years. The findings of this study underscore the importance of prioritizing efforts related to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of PJIs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Risk of complications with prolonged operative time in morbidly obese patients undergoing elective total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a high body-mass index (BMI) are at increased risk for significant complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We explored whether operative time is a modifiable risk factor for infectious and thromboembolic complications. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study of the ACS-NSQIP registry, including all patients who underwent primary TKA (2015-2018), and were morbidly obese (BMI 40 kg/m2 or greater) was performed. We created four categories of operative time in minutes: less than 60, 60-90, 91-120, and greater than 120. The association of prolonged operative time with superficial/deep surgical site infection (SSI), DVT and PE within 30 days postoperatively was evaluated using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 34,190 patients were included (median age 63 [IQR 57-68], mean BMI of 44.6 kg/m2 [SD 4.4]). The majority of patients had an operative time between 60-90 mins (n = 13,640, 39.9%) or 91-120 mins (n = 9908, 29.0%). There was no significant association between longer operative time and superficial/deep/organ-space SSI or PE. DVT risk was significantly increased. Patients with time exceeding 120 mins had nearly 2.5 greater odds of DVT compared to less than 60 minutes (OR 2.47, 95% CI: 1.39-4.39, P = 0.002). Odds of DVT were 1.73 times greater in those with time of 91-120 mins (OR 1.73, 95%CI: 0.98-3.05, P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Early infection and thromboembolic complications with prolonged operative time in morbidly obese patients remain low. We did not identify a significant association with increased operative time and superficial/deep SSI, or PE. There was a significantly increased risk for deep vein thrombosis with prolonged operative time.

Efficacy of hydrofibre dressing following total joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, over 1,000,000 total joint arthroplasty (TJA) surgeries are performed annually and has been forecasted that this number will exceed 4,000,000 by the year 2030. Many different types of dressing exist for use in TJA surgery, and it is unclear if any of the newer, hydrofibre dressings are superior to traditional dressings at reducing rates of infections or improving wound healing. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of hydrofiber dressings on reducing complications. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the online databases MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hydrofibre dressings to a standard dressing were included. Summary measures are reported as odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcome was prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Secondary outcomes included blisters, dressing changes and wound irritation. RESULTS: 5 RCTs were included. Hydrofibre dressing had no observable effect on PJI or wound irritation (OR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14-1.98; p = 0.35). Hydrofibre dressings reduced the rate of blisters (OR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.90; p = 0.03) and number of dressing changes (MD -1.89; 95% CI, -2.68 to -1.11). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, evidence suggests hydrofibre dressings have no observable effect on PJI and wound irritation. Evidence for reduction in blisters and number of dressings is modest given wide CIs and biased trial methodologies. Use of hydrofibre dressings should be considered inconclusive for mitigating major complications in light of current best evidence.

Sex-specific differences in 30-day outcomes following primary total hip replacement in 86,684 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Although differential outcomes based on sex are widespread in medicine and surgery, evaluation of sex-specific differences in the field of orthopaedic surgery in general - and arthroplasty in particular - are lacking. We hypothesised that morbidly obese male and female patients would have differing risks of surgical complications following primary total hip replacement. METHODS: We reviewed data contained within the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2015 through 2018, inclusive. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was used to determine the adjusted odds ratios (OR) of relevant variables on primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 86,684 patients undergoing THR were identified, of whom 9972 patients (4095 male and 5877 female) were morbidly obese. Among morbidly obese patients, odds of surgical site infection were higher in females than males within 30 days of surgery (adjusted OR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.79; p = 0.007). This comprised the odds of both superficial infection (1.8% vs. 1.1%, adjusted OR 1.67; 95% CI, 1.16-2.40; p = 0.006) and deep infection (1.9% vs. 1.4%, adjusted OR 1.22; 95% CI, 0.88-1.68; p = 0.24). Unexpected return to the operating room (i.e., reoperation) within 30 days of the surgical procedure was also higher among females than males (4.2% vs. 3.1%, adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI, 1.10-1.71, p = 0.005). There were no differences between male and female patients in the non-obese cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with morbid obesity, the risk of surgical site infection and reoperation within the first 30 days is greater in women as compared to men. Future research must address whether this early increased risk among morbidly obese women persists in the longer term, and whether it results in compromised function or quality of life.

The Use of Rifampin in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Rifampin is an antibiotic with the ability to penetrate bacterial biofilms, and thus has been considered as a potentially important adjunct in the prevention and treatment of PJI. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize the use of rifampin in TJA, particularly in the context of PJI. METHODS: A literature search of all relevant electronic databases was performed. All comparative studies assessing the use of rifampin in the context of TJA were included. Descriptive data are reported, and a meta-analysis was performed using all studies which compared the addition of rifampin to standard care in treating PJI. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of 22 studies comparing the addition of rifampin to standard care for treating PJI found a significant reduction in failure rates (26.0% vs 35.9%; odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.86). The protective effect of rifampin was maintained in studies which included exchange arthroplasty as a treatment strategy, but not in studies only using an implant retention strategy. Among studies reporting adverse events of rifampin, there was a 20.5% adverse event rate. CONCLUSION: Overall, rifampin appears to confer a protective effect against treatment failure following PJI. This treatment effect is particularly pronounced in the context of exchange arthroplasty. Further high-level evidence is needed to clarify the exact indications and doses of rifampin which can most effectively act as an adjunct in the treatment of PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Level I-III Studies.

Do Adhesive Drapes Have an Effect on Infection Rates in Orthopaedic Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adhesive surgical drapes are purported to reduce the rates of surgical site infection. Despite that, international surgical guidelines generally recommend against the use of such drapes; however, this is primarily based on nonorthopaedic evidence. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does the use of adhesive drapes decrease the risk of wound contamination? (2) Does intraoperative drape peeling (intentional or inadvertent) increase the risk of wound contamination? (3) Does the use of adhesive drapes decrease the risk of surgical site infection? METHODS: A systematic review of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook methods for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published since 2000 and comparing adhesive drapes with controls. All databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2021. A pooled meta-analysis was performed, where possible. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess risk of bias among the included studies. From among 417 search results, five eligible RCTs were identified and included, all of which were published between 2018 and 2020. There were a total of 2266 patients, with 1129 (49.8%) in the adhesive drape groups, and 1137 (50.2%) in the control groups. The studies included hip and knee surgery trials (n = 3 trials; 1020 patients in intervention groups and 1032 patients in control groups) as well as trials on shoulder arthroscopy (n = 1 trial; 65 patients in the intervention group and 61 patients in the control group) and lumbar spine surgery (n = 1 trial; 44 patients in each group). The data for all three outcomes (wound contamination, impact of intraoperative peeling, and surgical site infection) revealed low heterogeneity based on random-effects models (I2 = 14%, 0%, and 0%, respectively). RESULTS: Based on data from pooled wound swab culture results from four studies, a reduction in wound contamination was associated with the use of adhesive drapes (odds ratio 0.49 [95% CI 0.34 to 0.72]; p < 0.001). The available evidence was inconclusive to determine whether intraoperative drape peeling (intentional or inadvertent) influenced the risk of wound contamination. Three studies did not report on this outcome, one study found an increased infection rate with drape peel back, and another study found a reduced treatment effect of adhesive drapes when peel back occurred in a subgroup analysis. The two studies that analyzed surgical site infections reported no infections in either arm; therefore, we could not answer the question of whether adhesive drapes affect risk of surgical site infection. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review suggest that adhesive drapes, including those with antimicrobial properties, decrease the risk of wound contamination during orthopaedic procedures. In circumstances where drape adhesion is compromised and peel back occurs at the wound edge, there is an increased risk of wound contamination with the use of adhesive drapes. The best currently available evidence is indeterminate as to the effect of adhesive drapes on the risk of surgical site infections; however, if used, care should be taken to avoid or minimize drape peel back. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Surgery-related predictors of kneeling ability following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Kneeling ability is among the poorest outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to: (1) quantify kneeling ability after TKA; (2) identify surgical approaches and prosthesis designs that improve kneeling ability following TKA; and (3) quantify the effectiveness of these approaches. METHODS: We performed a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines of multiple medical databases. Data relating to demographics, TKA technique, prosthesis design, and kneeling-specific outcomes were extracted. Comparative outcomes data were pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies met the eligibility criteria. The proportion of patients able to kneel increased with longer follow-up (36.8% at a minimum of 1 year follow-up versus 47.6% after a minimum of 3 years follow-up, p < 0.001). The odds of kneeling were greater for patients undergoing an anterolateral incision compared with an anteromedial incision (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.3-6.9, p = 0.02); a transverse incision compared with a longitudinal incision (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.4-8.7, p = 0.008); and a shorter incision compared with a longer incision (OR 8.5, 95% CI 2.3-30.9, p = 0.001). The odds of kneeling were worse for a mobile prosthesis compared with a fixed platform design (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.7, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: A large majority of patients are unable to kneel following TKA, although the ability to kneel improves over time. This evidence may facilitate preoperative patient counseling. Variations in choice of incision location and length may affect ability to kneel; however, high-quality randomized trials are needed to corroborate our findings.

Medical Cannabis for Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review of Health Care Recommendations.

Purpose: Medical cannabis for patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) has been the focus of numerous health care recommendations. We conducted a systematic review to identify and summarize the currently available evidence-based recommendations. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane database of systematic reviews, and websites for clinical guidelines and recommendations. We summarized the type of the publications, developers, approach of health care recommendation development, year and country of publication, and conditions that were addressed. We categorized the direction and strength of each recommendation. Results: We identified 12 eligible publications. Publication years ranged from 2007 to 2019; four (33.3%) of them were published in 2018. Canada ranked first for the number of publications (n = 4, 33.3%). Most (n = 11, 92%) of the included recommendations were based on both a systematic review of the best evidence and expert consensus. All the included publications provided a recommendation supporting medical cannabis for CNCP in general and for the specific conditions of neuropathic pain, chronic pain in people living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), and chronic abdominal pain, with detailed information sharing and comprehensive consideration of a patient's own values and preferences. Conclusion: Clinicians can attend to the guidance currently offered, being aware that only weak recommendations are available for medical cannabis in patients with CNCP, as a third- or fourth-line therapy. Detailed discussions with patients regarding the benefits in reducing pain and potential adverse effects are required before its prescription.

How Satisfied Are Patients and Surgeons with Telemedicine in Orthopaedic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in a rapid pivot toward telemedicine owing to closure of in-person elective clinics and sustained efforts at physical distancing worldwide. Throughout this period, there has been revived enthusiasm for delivering and receiving orthopaedic care remotely. Unfortunately, rapidly published editorials and commentaries during the pandemic have not adequately conveyed findings of published randomized trials on this topic. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials, we asked: (1) What are the levels of patient and surgeon satisfaction with the use of telemedicine as a tool for orthopaedic care delivery? (2) Are there differences in patient-reported outcomes between telemedicine visits and in-person visits? (3) What is the difference in time commitment between telemedicine and in-person visits? METHODS: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review with the primary objective to determine patient and surgeon satisfaction with telemedicine, and secondary objectives to determine differences in patient-reported outcomes and time commitment. We used combinations of search keywords and medical subject headings around the terms "telemedicine", "telehealth", and "virtual care" combined with "orthopaedic", "orthopaedic surgery" and "randomized." We searched three medical databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) in duplicate and performed manual searches to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the outcomes of telemedicine and in-person orthopaedic assessments. Trials that studied an intervention that was considered to be telemedicine (that is, any form of remote or virtual care including, but not limited to, video, telephone, or internet-based care), had a control group that comprised in-person assessments performed by orthopaedic surgeons, and were reports of Level I original evidence were included in this study. Studies evaluating physiotherapy or rehabilitation interventions were excluded. Data was extracted by two reviewers and quantitative and qualitive summaries of results were generated. Methodological quality of included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, which uniformly rated the trials at high risk of bias within the blinding categories (blinding of providers, patients, and outcome assessors). We screened 133 published articles; 12 articles (representing eight randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. There were 1008 patients randomized (511 to telemedicine groups and 497 to control groups). Subspecialties represented were hip and knee arthroplasty (two trials), upper extremity (two trials), pediatric trauma (one trial), adult trauma (one trial), and general orthopaedics (two trials). RESULTS: There was no difference in the odds of satisfaction between patients receiving telemedicine care and those receiving in-person care (pooled odds ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.40 to 1.99]; p = 0.79). There were also no differences in surgeon satisfaction (pooled OR 0.38 [95% CI 0.07 to 2.19]; p = 0.28) or among multiple patient-reported outcome measures that evaluated pain and function. Patients reported time savings, both when travel time was excluded (17 minutes shorter [95% CI 2 to 32]; p = 0.03) and when it was included (180 minutes shorter [95% CI 78 to 281]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Evidence from heterogeneous randomized studies demonstrates that the use of telemedicine for orthopaedic assessments does not result in identifiable differences in patient or surgeon satisfaction compared with in-person assessments. Importantly, the source studies in this review did not adequately capture or report safety endpoints, such as complications or missed diagnoses. Future studies must be adequately powered to detect these differences to ensure patient safety is not compromised with the use of telemedicine. Although telemedicine may lead to a similar patient experience, surgeons should maintain a low threshold for follow-up with in-person assessments whenever possible in the absence of further safety data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Local antibiotics in primary hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Infection is a truly devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty, causing most patients to undergo a revision surgery, and to bear significant psychological and financial burden. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate the literature to determine the efficacy and complication profile of local antibiotic application in primary total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: All studies of primary total joint arthroplasty which assessed local antibiotics in any form other than antibiotic-impregnated cement as an intervention were included. Studies that reported at least one outcome related to infection and were available in full text in English were eligible for inclusion. Studies which included both primary and revision cases but did not report the stratified data for each type of surgery and studies on fracture populations were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies involving 3,714 cases were included. The pooled deep infection rate was 1.6% in the intervention groups and 3.5% in the control groups. Meta-analysis revealed a RR of 0.53 (95%CI: 0.35-0.79, p = 0.002) with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) for infection in the intervention groups. Meta-analysis revealed a non-significant reduction in superficial infection rates in the intervention groups; however, there was a significant increase in aseptic wound complications in the intervention groups. CONCLUSION: Local antibiotic application results in a moderate reduction in deep infection rates in primary total joint arthroplasty, with no significant impact on superficial infection rates. However, local antibiotic application may be associated with a moderate increase in aseptic wound complications.

Early Discharge After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty-An Observational Cohort Study Evaluating Safety in 330,000 Patients.

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable interest in recent years for early discharge after arthroplasty. We endeavored to evaluate the safety of same-day discharge given the rapid uptake of this practice approach. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry database. We included patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between 2015 and 2018. We categorized length of stay (LOS) as same-day discharge (LOS = 0 days), accelerated discharge (LOS = 1 day), and routine discharge (LOS = 2-3 days). For each LOS cohort, we determined the incidence of major complications within 30 days (surgical site infection [SSI], reoperation, readmission, deep vein thrombosis [DVT], and PE) and evaluated risk using multivariate logistic regression analysis if incidence was >1%. Patients undergoing THA and TKA were evaluated independently. RESULTS: The final study cohort consisted of 333,212 patients, including 124,150 who underwent THA (37%) and 209,062 who had TKA (63%). In the THA same-day discharge cohort, the incidence of superficial SSI (0.2%), deep/organ space SSI (0.3%), DVT (0.2%), and PE (0.2%) was low. The risk of reoperation was comparable to routine discharge (odds ratio [OR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.09; P = .17) and readmission rate was significantly lower (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48-0.76; P < .001). The risk of reoperation and readmission was also lower in the accelerated discharge cohort compared to routine discharge. In the TKA same-day discharge cohort, the risk of superficial SSI (0.3%), deep/organ space SSI (0.3%), reoperation (0.8%), DVT (0.4%), and PE (0.5%) was low. The risk of readmission after same-day discharge was comparable to routine discharge (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.71-1.01; P = .07). In the accelerated discharge cohort, there was a small reduction in readmission risk (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.93; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This large, observational, real-world study suggests that same-day and accelerated discharge management is safe clinical practice for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty, yielding a similar risk of major acute 30-day complications. Further clinical trials evaluating long-term major outcomes, including patient-reported outcomes and experiences, would offer further and definitive insight into this practice approach.

Association of Three-Month Radiographic Union Score for Tibia Fractures (RUST) with Nonunion in Tibial Shaft Fracture Patients.

Objectives Nonunions of tibial shaft fractures have profound implications on patient quality of life and are associated with physical and mental suffering. Radiographic Union Score for Tibia Fractures (RUST) may serve as an important prognostic tool for identifying patients at a high risk of nonunion. Design We used data from the Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) and Fluid Lavage of Open Wounds (FLOW) trials to explore the association of three-month RUST scores with nonunion in patients with tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nailing. We performed a retrospective cohort study nested within two multi-center, randomized controlled trials. Participants The patients included in the current study: (1) sustained a tibial shaft fracture and were enrolled in the SPRINT or FLOW randomized trials, (2) had initial operative management with intramedullary nailing, (3) showed radiographic evidence of an unhealed fracture at the three-month follow-up, and (4) their healing status (union or nonunion) was captured at 12-months postoperatively. Intervention Multivariable binary logistic regression was carried out to identify factors associated with nonunion, including open versus closed injury, fracture severity, fracture gap, and three-month RUST score. We determined the concordance statistic (c statistic) for our regression model both with and without the RUST score. Outcome Measurements and Results Of the 155 tibial fracture patients with complete data available for analysis, the overall rate of nonunion at 12 months was 30% (n=47). The mean three-month RUST score in patients with nonunion at 12 months was 4.8 (standard deviation (SD) 1.1) as compared to 6.3 (SD 1.7) for those healed at 12 months. In our multivariable regression analysis, open fractures conferred five-fold greater odds of nonunion at 12 months as compared to closed fractures (odds ratio (OR) 4.76, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.71-13.30). Further, three-month RUST scores of 4 and 5-6 were associated with a 47% (95% CI: 18%-73%) and 23% (4.5-51.5%) absolute risk increase of nonunion as compared to a score of ≥ 7, respectively. The addition of RUST scores to our adjusted regression model improved the c statistic from 0.70 (95%CI: 0.61-0.79) to 0.81 (95%CI: 0.74-0.88). Conclusion A third of patients with tibial shaft fractures who have failed to heal by three months will show nonunion at one year. Open fractures and lower three-month RUST scores are strongly associated with a higher risk of nonunion at one year. Further research is needed to establish whether prognosis in this high-risk group can be modified.

Antibiotic Cement in Arthroplasty: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Introduction Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following arthroplasty surgery is a devastating complication. Antibiotic cement has been proposed as a way to reduce PJI rates. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review all of the available randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence on the use of antibiotic cement in arthroplasty. Methods PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched. All records were screened in triplicate. Eligible RCTs were included. Data regarding study characteristics, patient demographics, and rates of superficial and deep infection were collected. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 2.0. Results Five RCTs were included (n = 4,397). Four studies compared antibiotic cement to plain cement while one study compared high-dose dual-antibiotic (HDDA) cement to low-dose single-antibiotic (LDSA) cement. The mean age of included patients was 76.4 years (range: 68-83). There was no significant difference in superficial infection rates between antibiotic and plain cement (odds ratio (OR): 1.33, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.77-2.30, p = 0.3). There was a large but non-significant reduction in deep infection rates for antibiotic cement (OR: 0.20, 95%CI: 0.03-1.32, p = 0.09). There was a significantly lower rate of infection with HDDA as compared to LDSA (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.09-0.88, p = 0.041). Conclusion The available evidence from RCTs reveals a potential benefit for antibiotic cement in arthroplasty surgery, though this difference is non-significant and highly imprecise. Furthermore, HDDA cement was significantly more effective than LDSA cement. There is a need for large, pragmatic trials on this topic.

Nonunion in Patients with Tibial Shaft Fractures: Is Early Physical Status Associated with Fracture Healing?

Background Nonunions of tibial shaft fractures have devastating physical and psychological consequences for patients. It remains unknown if early functional status can identify patients at risk for nonunion. Questions/Purposes To determine if functional status at three months after surgery, as measured by either the short form 36 (SF-36) or the short form 12 (SF-12) health survey physical component summary (SF-12 PCS) score, can serve as a prognostic indicator for nonunion at one year in patients with fractures of the tibial shaft. Patients/Methods This study was an observational cohort study nested within two multicenter, randomized controlled trials. Patients who met the following eligibility criteria were included: (1) sustained a tibial shaft fracture that was treated with intramedullary nailing, (2) were unhealed at the three-month follow-up, (3) had a reported SF-36 or SF-12 PCS score at three months, (4) had the final 12-month follow-up with a reported radiographic healing status (bone union or nonunion), and (5) were enrolled in either the Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Shaft Fractures (SPRINT) or Fluid Lavage of Open Wounds (FLOW) randomized trials. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association between healing status at 12 months and seven prognostic variables (open fracture, fracture pattern, nailing technique, smoking, fracture gap, three-month PCS score, and FLOW vs. SPRINT trial). Results A total of 940 patients were included in this study with an overall rate of radiographic nonunion of 13.3% (n=125) at the 12-month follow-up. Absolute nonunion risk increased with incrementally lower PCS scores (8.2%, 12.8%, 15.9%, 23.7% for scores ≥ 40, 30.0-39.99, 20.0-29.99, and < 20, respectively). In the multivariable regression analysis, PCS scores of < 20 were associated with a 2.6-times greater odds and 10% absolute risk increase of non-union, as compared to scores of ≥ 40 (OR 2.58, 95%CI: 1.02-6.53, ARI: 10.3, 95% CI: 0.1 - 28.2), whereas scores between 20 and 30 were associated with a nearly two-times greater odds of nonunion and a 6.4% absolute risk increase of nonunion (OR 1.94, 95%CI: 1.08-3.49, ARI: 6.4, 95% CI 0.6 - 15.3). Open fractures also conferred a 2.8-fold increase in odds of nonunion as compared to closed injuries (OR 2.77, 95%CI: 1.58-4.83), as did complex fractures when compared to simple fractures (OR 2.57, 95%CI: 1.64-4.02). Conclusion A considerable portion of patients with fractures of the tibial shaft treated with intramedullary nailing will experience nonunion at one-year postoperatively. Nonunion can be accurately predicted by patient functional recovery at three months as measured by the PCS of the SF-36 and SF-12 instruments.

The Effect of Irrigation Fluid on Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction Rates of osteoarthritis and total joint arthroplasty (TJA) are on the rise globally. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most devastating complication of TJA. A number of different intraoperative interventions have been proposed in an effort to reduce infection rates, including antibiotic cements, local antibiotic powder, and various irrigation solutions. The evidence on the importance of irrigation solutions is limited but has gained prominence recently, including the publication of a large randomized controlled trial (RCT). Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of various irrigation solutions and pressures at reducing the rates of PJI. Methods A systematic review was performed using the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. All records were screened in duplicate. Data collected included basic study characteristics, the details of the intervention and comparison solutions, if applicable, and rates of superficial and deep infection. A meta-analysis of comparative studies was performed to assess for consistency and potential direction of effect.  Results A total of ten studies were included, of which one was an RCT, eight were retrospective cohorts, and one was a case series. In total, there were 29,630 TJAs in 29,596 patients. The mean age ranged from 61 to 80 years. Six studies compared povidone-iodine (Betadine®) to normal saline, two studies compared chlorhexidine to saline, one study compared "triple prophylaxis" to standard practice, and one study used gentamicin but had no comparison group. The pooled risk ratio for deep infection in studies using Betadine® compared to saline was 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33-1.19), while for chlorhexidine it was 0.74 (95%CI: 0.33-1.65). Discussion Current evidence on the relative efficacy of irrigating solutions as prophylaxis for infection following TJA remains inconclusive. Imprecision of estimates vindicates the need for a definitive trial to further inform their use in surgical practice.  Conclusion Antiseptic irrigation during TJA with solutions (Betadine®, chlorhexidine) may decrease PJI risk in patients undergoing primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasties. Wide confidence intervals and heterogeneity among studies, however, render conclusions untrustworthy. Well-conducted RCTs are very much needed to help further investigate this issue.

Osteoarthritis, mobility-related comorbidities and mortality: an overview of meta-analyses.

AIMS: The objective of this review was to examine the relationship between osteoarthritis (OA) and mobility-related comorbidities, specifically diabetes mellitus (DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). It also investigated the relationship between OA and mortality. METHODS: An overview of meta-analyses was conducted by performing two targeted searches from inception to June 2020. The association between OA and (i) DM or CVD (via PubMed and Embase); and (ii) mortality (via PubMed) was investigated. Meta-analyses were selected if they included studies that examined adults with OA at any site and reported associations between OA and DM, CVD, or mortality. Evidence was synthesized qualitatively. RESULTS: Six meta-analyses met inclusion criteria. One meta-analysis of 20 studies demonstrated a statistically significant association between OA and DM, with pooled odds ratio of 1.41 (95% confidence interval: 1.21, 1.65; n = 1,040,175 patients). One meta-analysis of 15 studies demonstrated significantly increased risk of CVD among OA patients, with a pooled risk ratio of 1.24 (1.12, 1.37, n = 358,944 patients). Stratified by type of CVD, OA was shown to be associated with increased heart failure (HF) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) and reduced transient ischemic attack (TIA). There was no association reported for stroke or myocardial infarction (MI). Three meta-analyses did not find a significant association between OA (any site) and all-cause mortality. However, OA was found to be significantly associated with cardiovascular-related death across two meta-analyses. CONCLUSION: The identified meta-analyses reported significantly increased risk of both DM and CVD (particularly, HF and IHD) among OA patients. It was not possible to confirm consistent directional or causal relationships. OA was found to be associated with increased mortality, but mostly in relation to CVD-related mortality, suggesting that further study is warranted in this area.

The Impact of Evidence in Surgery of the Musculoskeletal System.

There have been a growing number of landmark randomized controlled trials published in the orthopedic literature over the past decade. These large-scale trials have had a substantial impact on informing clinical orthopedic practice globally. This review highlights a selected sample of such pivotal trials, across the subspecialties of trauma, sports medicine, arthroplasty, spine, and the important topic of intimate partner violence.