RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although the direct anterior (DA) approach has increased in popularity for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is limited evidence regarding its use for revision THA. It is unknown whether the dislocation benefit seen in the primary setting translates to revision cases. METHODS: This retrospective review compared the dislocation rates of revision THA performed through DA versus postero-lateral (PL) approaches at a single institution (2011 to 2021). Exclusion criteria included revision for instability, ≥ 2 prior revisions, approaches other than DA or PL, and placement of dual-mobility or constrained liners. There were 182 hips in 173 patients that met the inclusion criteria. The average follow-up was 6.5 years (range, 2 to 8 years). RESULTS: There was a trend toward more both-component revisions being performed through the PL approach. There were no differences in dislocation rates between the DA revision and PL revision cohorts, which were 8.1% (5 of 72) and 7.5% (9 of 120), respectively (P = .999). Dislocation trended lower when the revision approach was discordant from the primary approach compared to cases where primary and revision had a concordant approach (4.9 versus 8.5%), but this was not statistically significant (P = .740). No significant differences were found in return to operating room, 90-day emergency department visits, or 90-day readmissions. However, the length of stay was significantly shorter in patients who had DA revisions after a primary PL procedure (P = .021). CONCLUSIONS: Dislocation rates following revision THA did not differ between the DA and PL approaches irrespective of the primary approach. Surgeons should choose their revision approach based on their experience and the specific needs of the patient.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The shift toward outpatient total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) has led to a demand for effective perioperative pain control methods. A surgeon-performed "low" adductor canal block ("low-ACB") technique, involving an intraoperative ACB, is gaining popularity due to its efficiency and early pain control potential. This study examined the transition from traditional preoperative anesthesiologist-performed ultrasound-guided adductor canal blocks ("high-ACB") to low-ACB, evaluating pain control, morphine consumption, first physical therapy visit gait distance, hospital length-of-stay, and complications. METHODS: There were 2,620 patients at a single institution who underwent a primary total knee arthroplasty between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022, and received either a low-ACB or high-ACB. Cohorts included 1,248 patients and 1,372 patients in the low-ACB and high-ACB groups, respectively. Demographics and operative times were similar. Patient characteristics and outcomes such as morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), Visual Analog Scale pain scores, gait distance (feet), length of stay (days), and postoperative complications (30-day readmission and 30-day emergency department visit) were collected. RESULTS: The low-ACB cohort had higher pain scores over the first 24 hours (5.05 versus 4.86, P < .001) and higher MME at 6 hours (11.49 versus 8.99, P < .001), although this was not clinically significant. There was no difference in pain scores or MME at 12 or 24 hours (20.81 versus 22.07 and 44.67 versus 48.78, respectively). The low-ACB cohort showed longer gait distance at the first physical therapy visit (188.5 versus 165.1 feet, P < .001) and a shorter length of stay (0.88 versus 1.46 days, P < .01), but these were not clinically significant. There were no differences in 30-day complications. CONCLUSIONS: The low-ACB offers effective pain relief and comparable early recovery without increasing operative time or the complication rate. Low-ACB is an effective, safe, and economical alternative to high-ACB. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III (retrospective cohort study).
