Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Arthroplasty ; 2024 Jun 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38914145

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Recent liquid adhesive skin closure systems with a mesh patch and a 2-octyl cyanoacrylate liquid formula have shown promising results in total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Chemical accelerators are typically included to promote the rapid polymerization of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate. The goal of the study is to distinguish designs and wound complication differences between two similar systems. METHODOLOGY: An eighteen-week retrospective study was conducted from July to December 2023, including 207 total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 212 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cases from four attending surgeons at one institution that used one of two dressing designs. Both dressings had a 2-octyl cyanoacrylate liquid adhesive formula that applied topically to a polyester-based mesh overlaying the wound. Mesh A (used in 274 cases) included an accelerator, a quaternary ammonium salt, on the mesh patch, whereas Mesh B (used in 145 cases) included a similar accelerator within the adhesive applicator. RESULTS: Wound complications (3.2 versus 7.6%; X2 = 3.86; df = 1; P = 0.049), early periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) (0 versus 2.8%; X2 = 7.63; df = 1; P = 0.006), and 90-day reoperations for wound complications (0.4 versus 3.4%; X2 = 6.39; df = 1; P = 0.011) were significantly lower in patients who received Mesh A versus B, respectively. There was no difference in superficial surgical site infections (SSI) (0.7 versus 0%; X2 = 1.06; df = 1; P = 0.302) or allergy rates (3.3 versus 4.1%; X2 = 0.12; df = 1; P = 0.655) between Mesh A and B. CONCLUSION: We observed significantly different performance in wound complications, early postoperative PJI, and 90-day reoperation between the two designs. Having the accelerator in the applicator rather than on the mesh patch, may lead to premature polymerization before bonding appropriately with the mesh to create the desired wound closure and seal.

2.
Arthroplast Today ; 27: 101432, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38882465

RESUMO

Background: Initial stability of cementless stems is important to minimize the risk of subsidence, pain, and periprosthetic fracture after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Collared stems improve initial component stability when contacting the femoral calcar. Direct contact is not always achieved, and collared stem performance has not been studied in this context. We hypothesized that collared stems achieving direct contact would demonstrate reduced subsidence. Methods: A single-surgeon retrospective study of 482 consecutive primary THAs implanted between February 2020 and May 2023 using collared cementless stems was performed. The 2 cohorts included stems with initial collar-calcar contact vs stems without. Subsidence was evaluated by comparing intraoperative fluoroscopy to postoperative 8-week radiographs. Binary logistic regression identified independent risk factors for subsidence. Chi-square tests were used for categorical variables and t-tests for continuous variables. Results: Of stems, 63.9% achieved initial collar-calcar contact, while 36.1% did not. The rate (1.3% vs 19.0%; P < .001) and magnitude (0.02 mm, range 0-3 mm vs 0.35 mm, range 0-3 mm; P < .001) of subsidence were significantly higher among stems without initial contact. Stems without initial collar-calcar contact (P < .001) and male gender (P = .007) were independent risk factors for subsidence. Two patients with initial contact had nondisplaced calcar cracks and <3 mm of subsidence at 4 weeks, which healed with protected weight-bearing. Stem survivorship was 100% in both groups, with all achieving osteointegration and none needing revision. Conclusions: Excellent performance of collared cementless stems was observed at 8 weeks after primary THA. Initial collar-calcar contact lowered the risk and magnitude of minor subsidence but did not affect survivorship or fracture risk. Level of Evidence: Level III.

3.
J Arthroplasty ; 2024 Mar 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38522802

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Maximizing operative room (OR) efficiency is important for hospital efficiency, patient care, and positive surgeon and staff morale. Reducing turnover time (TOT) has become a popular focus to improve OR efficiency. The present study evaluated if TOT is influenced by changing case type, implant vendor, and/or laterality. METHODS: In total, 444 turnovers from January to July 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. All turnovers were same-surgeon turnovers between primary arthroplasty cases in dedicated, overlapping rooms. Single linear regression models tested the predictability of TOT based on case type, vendor, and laterality. A multivariate multiple regression and 1-way Analyses of Variance analyzed variables against each other. Independent sample t-tests evaluated TOTs when all variables were the same or different. RESULTS: Changing versus keeping the same case type increased TOT by 2.4 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7, 4.0; P = .004). Changing vendors increased TOT by 2.9 minutes (95% CI = 1.1, 4.7; P = .002). Laterality did not affect TOT, with a change of 0.9 minutes (95% CI = -0.6, 2.5; P = .229). Vendor (P = .030) independently predicted TOT when analyzed as a covariate with case type (P = .410). The TOT with same case type and vendor (mean 38.2 minutes; range, 22 to 62) was less than that of different case types and vendors (mean 41.4 minutes; range, 26 to 73) (P = .017). Mean TOT differed by 5.5 minutes when keeping all variables the same versus all different (P = .018). CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining a consistent case type, vendor, and laterality had a synergistic effect in reducing TOT in arthroplasty ORs with the same primary surgeon running 2 overlapping rooms. Changing vendor representatives was found to independently predict TOT increases, which is likely attributed to a disruption in workflow and collaboration of the multidisciplinary OR team. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...