RESUMO
Background: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures are expected to grow exponentially in the upcoming years, highlighting the importance of identifying preoperative risk factors that predispose patients to poor outcomes. The present study sought to determine if preoperative healthcare events (PHEs) influenced outcomes following TKA. Methods: This was a retrospective review of all patients who underwent TKA at a single institution from June 2011 to April 2022. Patients who had a PHE within 90 days of surgery, defined as an emergency department visit or hospital admission, were compared to patients with no history of PHE. Patients who underwent revision, nonelective, and/or bilateral TKA were excluded. Chi-squared analysis and independent sample t-tests were used to determine significant differences between demographic variables. All significant covariates were included in binary logistic regressions used to predict discharge disposition, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision. Results: Of the 10,869 patients who underwent TKA, 265 had ≥1 PHE. Patients who had a PHE were significantly more likely to require facility discharge (odds ratio [OR]: 1.662; P = .001) than patients who did not have a PHE. Any PHE predisposed patients to significantly higher 90-day readmission rates (OR: 2.173; P = .002). Patients with ≥2 PHEs were at a significantly higher risk of 1-year revision (OR: 5.870; P = .004) compared to patients without a PHE. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that PHEs put patients at significantly greater risk of facility discharge, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision. Moving forward, consideration of elective surgery scheduling in the context of a recent PHE may lead to improved postoperative outcomes. Level III Evidence: Retrospective Cohort Study.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: To improve revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) prognosis and postoperative management, a better understanding of how non-elective and elective indications influence clinical outcomes is needed. We sought to compare ambulatory status, complication rates, and implant survival rates in patients who underwent aseptic rTHA for periprosthetic fracture or elective indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined all aseptic rTHA patients with a minimum follow-up of two years at a single tertiary referral center. Patients were divided into two groups: fracture rTHA (F-rTHA) if the patient had a periprosthetic femoral or acetabular fracture, and elective rTHA (E-rTHA) if the patient underwent rTHA for other aseptic indications. Multivariate regression was performed for clinical outcomes to adjust for baseline characteristics, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to assess implant survival. RESULTS: A total of 324 patients (F-rTHA: 67, E-rTHA: 257) were included. In the F-rTHA cohort, 57 (85.0%) and 10 (15.0%) had femoral and acetabular periprosthetic fractures, respectively. F-rTHA patients were more likely to be discharged to skilled nursing (40.3% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.049) and acute rehabilitation facilities (19.4% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.004). F-rTHA patients had higher 90-day readmission rates (26.9% vs. 16.0%, p = 0.033). Ambulatory status at three months postoperatively significantly differed (p = 0.004); F-rTHA patients were more likely to use a walker (44.6% vs. 18.8%) and less likely to ambulate independently (19.6% vs. 28.6%) or with a cane (28.6% vs. 41.1%). These differences did not persist at one and two years postoperatively. Freedom from all-cause re-revision (77.6% vs. 74.7%, p = 0.912) and re-revision due to PJI (88.1% vs. 91.9%, p = 0.206) were similar at five-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to rTHA performed for elective aseptic indications, fracture rTHA patients had poorer early functional outcomes, with greater need for ambulatory aids and non-home discharge. However, these differences did not persist long term and did not portend increased infection or re-revision rates.
