AimsDual-mobility (DM) components are increasingly used to prevent and treat dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a rare complication of DM that is believed to have decreased with contemporary implants. This study aimed to report incidence, treatment, and outcomes of contemporary DM IPD.MethodsA total of 1,453 DM components were implanted at a single academic institution between January 2010 and December 2021: 695 in primary and 758 in revision THA. Of these, 49 presented with a dislocation of the large DM head and five presented with an IPD. At the time of closed reduction of the large DM dislocation, six additional IPDs occurred. The mean age was 64 years (SD 9.6), 54.5% were female (n = 6), and mean follow-up was 4.2 years (SD 1.8). Of the 11 IPDs, seven had a history of instability, five had abductor insufficiency, four had prior lumbar fusion, and two were conversions for failed fracture management.ResultsThe incidence of IPD was 0.76%. Of the 11 IPDs, ten were missed either at presentation or after attempted reduction. All ten patients with a missed IPD were discharged with a presumed reduction. The mean time from IPD to surgical treatment was three weeks (0 to 23). One patient died after IPD prior to revision. Of the ten remaining hips with IPD, the DM head was exchanged in two, four underwent acetabular revision with DM exchange, and four were revised to a constrained liner. Of these, five (50%) underwent reoperation at a mean 1.8 years (SD 0.73), including one additional acetabular revision. No patients who underwent initial acetabular revision for IPD treatment required subsequent reoperation.ConclusionThe overall rate of IPD was low at 0.76%. It is essential to identify an IPD on radiographs as the majority were missed at presentation or after iatrogenic dissociation. Surgeons should consider acetabular revision for IPD to allow conversion to a larger DM head, and take care to remove impinging structures that may increase the risk of subsequent failure.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):98–104.
Anonymizing Radiographs Using an Object Detection Deep Learning Algorithm
Background: Dual-mobility (DM) implants reduce the risk of dislocation in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, DM implants are at risk for large-head dislocation and intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD), where the inner femoral head dissociates from the outer polyethylene head. This study aimed to report the incidence of DM dislocation and IPD, evaluate the rate of recognition of IPD before and after reduction, investigate the outcomes of these complications, and provide treatment recommendations for their management. Methods: Between 2010 and 2021, 695 primary and 758 revision THAs were performed with DM constructs at a single institution. There were 44 large-head dislocations (3.0%) and 10 IPDs (0.7%). Four additional IPDs occurred during attempted closed reduction, increasing the IPD incidence to 0.96%. We reviewed prior instability history, dislocation management, success of reduction, recognition of IPD, and subsequent rates of revision and complications. The mean follow-up was 2.5 years. Results: Nine of 10 IPDs were missed at presentation and thus not treated as such. Sixty-three percent of attempted closed reductions in the emergency department failed and led to 4 IPDs and 1 periprosthetic fracture. Reduction success was associated with the following factors: use of general anesthesia with paralysis (p = 0.02), having the reduction performed by an orthopaedist (p = 0.03), and undergoing only 1 reduction attempt (p = 0.015). Two-thirds of dislocations required revision. The rate of redislocation was 33%, and 5 hips required subsequent revision at a mean of 1.8 years after the initial dislocation. Conclusions: We present an evaluation of DM-implant dislocation and dissociation along with management recommendations based on these data. Given the low success and high complication rates of attempted closed reduction and the need for eventual revision, we recommend that all patients with dislocated DM implants be brought to the operating room for closed reduction as well as potential revision if the reduction fails. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Primary total knee arthroplasty in patients with post-polio syndrome
AimsKnowledge on total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) in patients with a history of poliomyelitis is limited. This study compared implant survivorship and clinical outcomes among affected and unaffected limbs in patients with sequelae of poliomyelitis undergoing TKAs.MethodsA retrospective review of our total joint registry identified 94 patients with post-polio syndrome undergoing 116 primary TKAs between January 2000 and December 2019. The mean age was 70 years (33 to 86) with 56% males (n = 65) and a mean BMI of 31 kg/m2 (18 to 49). Rotating hinge TKAs were used in 14 of 63 affected limbs (22%), but not in any of the 53 unaffected limbs. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analyses were completed. The mean follow-up was eight years (2 to 19).ResultsThe ten-year survivorship free from revision was 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 81 to 100) in affected and 84% (95% CI 68 to 100) in unaffected limbs. There were six revisions in affected limbs: three for periprosthetic femoral fractures and one each for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), patellar clunk syndrome, and instability. Unaffected limbs were revised in four cases: two for instability and one each for PJI and tibial component loosening. The ten-year survivorship free from any reoperation was 86% (95% CI 75 to 97) and 80% (95% CI 64 to 99) in affected and unaffected limbs, respectively. There were three additional reoperations among affected and two in unaffected limbs. There were 12 nonoperative complications, including four periprosthetic fractures. Arthrofibrosis occurred in five affected (8%) and two unaffected limbs (4%). Postoperative range of motion decreased with 31% achieving less than 90° knee flexion by five years.ConclusionTKAs in post-polio patients are complex cases associated with instability, and one in four require constraint on the affected side. Periprosthetic fracture was the main mode of failure. Arthrofibrosis rates were high and twice as frequent in affected limbs.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(6):635–640.
Spinal versus general anaesthesia in contemporary primary total knee arthroplasties
Aims Spinal anaesthesia has seen increased use in contemporary primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). However, controversy exists about the benefits of spinal in comparison to general anaesthesia in primary TKAs. This study aimed to investigate the pain control, length of stay (LOS), and complications associated with spinal versus general anaesthesia in primary TKAs from a single, high-volume academic centre. Methods We retrospectively identified 17,690 primary TKAs (13,297 patients) from 2001 to 2016 using our institutional total joint registry, where 52% had general anaesthesia and 48% had spinal anaesthesia. Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts with a mean age of 68 years (SD 10), 58% female (n = 7,669), and mean BMI of 32 kg/m2 (SD 7). Pain was evaluated using oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) and numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) data. Complications including 30- and 90-day readmissions were studied. Data were analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted model based on propensity score that included many patient and surgical factors. Mean follow-up was seven years (2 to 18). Results Patients treated with spinal anaesthesia required fewer postoperative OMEs (p < 0.001) and had lower NPRS scores (p < 0.001). Spinal anaesthesia also had fewer cases of altered mental status (AMS; odds ratio (OR) 1.3; p = 0.044), as well as 30-day (OR 1.4; p < 0.001) and 90-day readmissions (OR 1.5; p < 0.001). General anaesthesia was associated with increased risk of any revision (OR 1.2; p = 0.021) and any reoperation (1.3; p < 0.001). Conclusion In the largest single institutional report to date, we found that spinal anaesthesia was associated with significantly lower OME use, lower risk of AMS, and lower overall 30- and 90-day readmissions following primary TKAs. Additionally, spinal anaesthesia was associated with reduced risk of any revision and any reoperation after accounting for numerous patient and operative factors. When possible and safe, spinal anaesthesia should be considered in primary TKAs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1209–1214.
Background: Establishing imaging registries for large patient cohorts is challenging because manual labeling is tedious and relying solely on DICOM (digital imaging and communications in medicine) metadata can result in errors. We endeavored to establish an automated hip and pelvic radiography registry of total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients by utilizing deep-learning pipelines. The aims of the study were (1) to utilize these automated pipelines to identify all pelvic and hip radiographs with appropriate annotation of laterality and presence or absence of implants, and (2) to automatically measure acetabular component inclination and version for THA images. Methods: We retrospectively retrieved 846,988 hip and pelvic radiography DICOM files from 20,378 patients who underwent primary or revision THA performed at our institution from 2000 to 2020. Metadata for the files were screened followed by extraction of imaging data. Two deep-learning algorithms (an EfficientNetB3 classifier and a YOLOv5 object detector) were developed to automatically determine the radiographic appearance of all files. Additional deep-learning algorithms were utilized to automatically measure the acetabular angles on anteroposterior pelvic and lateral hip radiographs. Algorithm performance was compared with that of human annotators on a random test sample of 5,000 radiographs. Results: Deep-learning algorithms enabled appropriate exclusion of 209,332 DICOM files (24.7%) as misclassified non-hip/pelvic radiographs or having corrupted pixel data. The final registry was automatically curated and annotated in <8 hours and included 168,551 anteroposterior pelvic, 176,890 anteroposterior hip, 174,637 lateral hip, and 117,578 oblique hip radiographs. The algorithms achieved 99.9% accuracy, 99.6% precision, 99.5% recall, and a 99.6% F1 score in determining the radiograph appearance. Conclusions: We developed a highly accurate series of deep-learning algorithms to rapidly curate and annotate THA patient radiographs. This efficient pipeline can be utilized by other institutions or registries to construct radiography databases for patient care, longitudinal surveillance, and large-scale research. The stepwise approach for establishing a radiography registry can further be utilized as a workflow guide for other anatomic areas. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Spinal Compared with General Anesthesia in Contemporary Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties
Background: The specific advantages of spinal anesthesia compared with general anesthesia for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the pain control, length of stay, and postoperative outcomes associated with spinal anesthesia compared with general anesthesia in a large cohort of primary THAs from a single, high-volume academic institution. Methods: We retrospectively identified 13,730 primary THAs (11,319 patients) from 2001 to 2016 using our total joint registry. Of these cases, 58% had general anesthesia and 42% had spinal anesthesia. The demographic characteristics were similar between groups, with mean age of 64 years, 51% female, and mean body mass index (BMI) of 31 kg/m 2 . Data were analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted model based on a propensity score that accounted for numerous patient and operative factors. The mean follow-up was 6 years. Results: Patients treated with spinal anesthesia had lower Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) scores (p < 0.001) and required fewer postoperative oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) at all time points evaluated (p < 0.001). Patients treated with spinal anesthesia also had shorter hospital length of stay (p = 0.02), fewer altered mental status events (odds ratio [OR], 0.7; p = 0.02), and fewer intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (OR, 0.7; p = 0.01). There was no difference in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (p = 0.8), pulmonary embolism (p = 0.4), 30-day readmissions (p = 0.17), 90-day readmissions (p = 0.18), all-cause revisions (p = 0.17), or all-cause reoperations (p = 0.14). Conclusions: In this large, single-institution study, we found that spinal anesthesia was associated with reduced pain scores and OME use postoperatively. Furthermore, spinal anesthesia resulted in fewer altered mental status events and ICU admissions. These data favor the use of spinal anesthesia in primary THAs. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Creation of a Total Hip Arthroplasty Patient-Specific Dislocation Risk Calculator
Background: Many risk factors have been described for dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA), yet a patient-specific risk assessment tool remains elusive. The purpose of this study was to develop a high-dimensional, patient-specific risk-stratification nomogram that allows dynamic risk modification based on operative decisions. Methods: In this study, 29,349 THAs, including 21,978 primary and 7371 revision cases, performed between 1998 and 2018 were evaluated. During a mean 6-year follow-up, 1521 THAs were followed by a dislocation. Patients were characterized, through individual-chart review, according to non-modifiable factors (demographics, indication for THA, spine disease, prior spine surgery, and neurologic disease) and modifiable operative decisions (operative approach, femoral head diameter, and type of acetabular liner [standard, elevated, constrained, or dual-mobility]). Multivariable regression models and nomograms were developed with dislocation as a binary outcome at 1 year and 5 years postoperatively. Results: Dislocation risk, based on patient-specific comorbidities and operative decisions, was wide-ranging—from 0.3% to 13% at 1 year and from 0.4% to 19% at 5 years after primary THA, and from 2% to 32% at 1 year and from 3% to 42% at 5 years after revision THA. In the primary-THA group, the direct anterior approach (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.27) and lateral approach (HR = 0.58) decreased the dislocation risk compared with the posterior approach. After adjusting for the approach in that group, the combination of a ≥36-mm-diameter femoral head and an elevated liner yielded the largest decrease in dislocation risk (HR = 0.28), followed by dual-mobility constructs (HR = 0.48). In the patients who underwent revision THA, the adjusted risk of dislocation was most markedly decreased by the use of a dual-mobility construct (HR = 0.40), followed by a ≥36-mm femoral head and an elevated liner (HR = 0.88). The adjusted risk of dislocation after revision THA was decreased by acetabular revision (HR = 0.58), irrespective of whether other components were revised. Conclusions: Our patient-specific dislocation risk calculator, which was strengthened by our use of a robust multivariable model that accounted for comorbidities associated with instability, demonstrated wide-ranging patient-specific risks based on comorbidity profiles. The resultant nomograms can be used as a screening tool to identify patients at high risk for dislocation following THA and to individualize operative decisions for evidence-based risk mitigation. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Redefining the 3D Topography of the Acetabular Safe Zone
Background: Dislocation is the most common reason for early revision following total hip arthroplasty (THA). More than 40 years ago, Lewinnek et al. proposed an acetabular “safe zone” to avoid dislocation. While novel at the time, their study was substantially limited according to modern standards. The purpose of this study was to determine optimal acetabular cup positioning during THA as well as the effect of surgical approach on the topography of the acetabular safe zone and the hazard of dislocation. Methods: Primary THAs that had been performed at a single institution from 2000 to 2017 were reviewed. Acetabular inclination and anteversion were measured using an artificial intelligence neural network; they were validated with performance testing and comparison with blinded grading by 2 orthopaedic surgeons. Patient demographics and dislocation were noted during follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression, including multidimensional analysis, was performed to define the 3D topography of the acetabular safe zone and its association with surgical approach. Results: We followed 9,907 THAs in 8,081 patients (4,166 women and 3,915 men; 64 ± 13 years of age) for a mean of 5 ± 3 years (range: 2 to 16); 316 hips (3%) sustained a dislocation during follow-up. The mean acetabular inclination was 44° ± 7° and the mean anteversion was 32° ± 9°. Patients who did not sustain a dislocation had a mean anteversion of 32° ± 9° (median, 32°), with the historic ideal anteversion of 15° observed to be only in the third percentile among non-dislocating THAs (p < 0.001). Multivariable modeling demonstrated the lowest dislocation hazards at an inclination of 37° and an anteversion of 27°, with an ideal modern safe zone of 27° to 47° of inclination and 18° to 38° of anteversion. Three-dimensional analysis demonstrated a similar safe-zone location but significantly different safe-zone topography among surgical approaches (p = 0.03) and sexes (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Optimal acetabular positioning differs significantly from historic values, with increased anteversion providing decreased dislocation risk. Additionally, surgical approach and patient sex demonstrated clear effects on 3D safe-zone topography. Further study is needed to characterize the 3D interaction between acetabular positioning and spinopelvic as well as femoral-sided parameters. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.