Valle, Alejandro González Della

The evaluation, classification, and treatment of significant bone loss after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to be a complex and debated topic in revision TKA (rTKA). Despite the introduction of new evidence and innovative technologies aimed at addressing the approach and care of severe bone loss in rTKA, there is no single document that systematically incorporates these newer surgical approaches. Therefore, a comprehensive review of the treatment of severe bone loss in rTKA is necessary. The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center Hospital for Special Surgery, dedicated to clinical care and research primarily in revision hip and knee replacement, convened a Management of Bone Loss in Revision TKA symposium on June 24, 2022. At this meeting, the 42 international invited experts were divided into groups; each group was assigned to discuss questions related to 1 of the 4 topics: (1) assessing preoperative workup and imaging, anticipated bone loss, classification system, and implant surveillance; (2) achieving durable fixation in the setting of significant bone loss in revision TKA; (3) managing patellar bone loss and the extensor mechanism in cases of severe bone loss; and (4) considering the use of complex modular replacement systems: hinges, distal femoral, and proximal tibial replacements. Each group came to consensus, when possible, based on an extensive literature review and interactive discussion on their group topic. This document reviews each these 4 areas, the consensus of each group, and directions for future research.

Background Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding the impact of peripheral nerve block (PNB) use in total hip/knee arthroplasty surgery. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis: randomized controlled and observational studies investigating the impact of PNB utilization on major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, thromboembolic, neurologic, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, were queried from 1946 to August 4, 2020. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence quality and for the development of recommendations. Results Analysis of 122 studies revealed that PNB use (compared with no use) was associated with lower ORs for (OR with 95% CIs) for numerous complications (total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), respectively): cognitive dysfunction (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.53/OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.80), respiratory failure (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.74/OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75), cardiac complications (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93/OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86), surgical site infections (OR 0.55 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64/OR 0.86 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91), thromboembolism (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96/OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96) and blood transfusion (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86/OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.92). Conclusions Based on the current body of evidence, the consensus group recommends PNB use in THA/TKA for improved outcomes. Recommendation: PNB use is recommended for patients undergoing THA and TKA except when contraindications preclude their use. Furthermore, the alignment of provider skills and practice location resources needs to be ensured. Evidence level: moderate; recommendation: strong.

Introduction Acetabular component position can be an important determinant of joint stability and bearing surface wear after THA. Nonetheless, the incidence of malpositioning is high. Patient obesity, low surgeon volume, and minimally invasive approaches are known risk factors for malposition. As the incidence of obesity continues to increase, it is important to recognise its effect on intraoperative component positioning in THA. Objectives Our goal was to assess the impact of obesity on component position for a high-volume surgeon using a standard postero-lateral approach. Methods A consecutive series of 120 obese (BMI >30, mean BMI 34.4) and 120 non-obese patients (mean BMI 25.4), who had undergone primary THA by a single surgeon, were included in our retrospective study. AP pelvis and cross-table radiographs obtained at the first postoperative visit were analysed using EBRA software to determine inclination and anteversion angles. Optimal position was defined as 30-45° of inclination and 5-25° of anteversion. Results Mean inclination and anteversion were 40.6 (+/-5.4°) and 16.6 (+/-5.5°) respectively, in the obese group and 39° (+/-5.0°) and 16.2° (+/-7.5°) in the non-obese group. In the obese group 89 (74%) patients were within the desired range for both measurements, 31 (26%) were out of range in at least one, compared to 91 (76%) and 29 (24%) in the non-obese group, respectively. The overall incidence of malpositioning was 25% for both groups. Among outliers, mean deviation from the optimal range was ≤3.8° in both groups. Conclusions The risk of component malpositioning in THA may be reduced when surgery is performed by an experienced, high volume surgeon utilising a standard posterolateral approach. In this setting the deleterious effect of obesity may be overcome.