Elbuluk, Ameer M.

Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the results of a biphasic synthetic scaffold (TruFit, Smith & Nephew) to microfracture for the treatment of knee cartilage defects and identify patient- and lesion-specific factors that influence outcomes. Design Prospectively collected data from 132 patients (mean age, 41.8 years; 69% male) with isolated chondral or osteochondral femoral defects treated with biphasic synthetic scaffolds ( n = 66) or microfracture ( n = 66) were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated longitudinally over 5 years with the Short Form–36 (SF-36), Activities of Daily Living of the Knee Outcome Survey (KOS-ADL), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Marx Activity Scale. Cartilage-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed to evaluate osseous integration and cartilage fill in a subgroup of patients. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify predictors of clinical outcomes within the scaffold group. Results Both groups demonstrated clinically significant improvements in knee clinical scores over 5 years ( P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in KOS-ADL and IKDC scores between groups up to 5 years postoperatively. Marx activity level scores in the microfracture group declined over time, while significant improvements in activity level scores were observed in the scaffold group over 5 years ( P < 0.01). Good-quality tissue fill and cartilage isointensity were more often observed in the scaffold group compared with the microfracture group, particularly with longer time intervals. Increasing age, high body mass index, prior microfracture, and traumatic etiology were predictors for inferior outcomes in the scaffold group. Conclusions Activity level and MRI appearance following treatment of cartilage lesions with the biphasic synthetic scaffold were superior to microfracture over time in this nonrandomized, retrospective comparison.

Aims While previously underappreciated, factors related to the spine contribute substantially to the risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). These factors must be taken into consideration during preoperative planning for revision THA due to recurrent instability. We developed a protocol to assess the functional position of the spine, the significance of these findings, and how to address different pathologies at the time of revision THA. Patients and Methods Prospectively collected data on 111 patients undergoing revision THA for recurrent instability from January 2014 to January 2017 at two institutions were included (protocol group) and matched 1:1 to 111 revisions specifically performed for instability not using this protocol (control group). Mean follow-up was 2.8 years. Protocol patients underwent standardized preoperative imaging including supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvis and lateral radiographs. Each case was scored according to the Hip-Spine Classification in Revision THA. Results Survival free of dislocation at two years was 97% in the protocol group (three dislocations, all within three months of surgery) versus 84% in the control group (18 patients). Furthermore, 77% of the inappropriately positioned acetabular components would have been unrecognized by supine AP pelvis imaging alone. Conclusion Using the Hip-Spine Classification System in revision THA, we demonstrated a significant decrease in the risk of recurrent instability compared with a control group. Without the use of this algorithm, 77% of inappropriately positioned acetabular components would have been unrecognized and incorrect treatment may have been instituted. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:817–823.

Background Peer-to-peer advisory among colleagues in orthopedic surgery is commonplace in academic medical centers. In the private practice setting, however, it becomes more difficult for surgeons to discuss complex cases among peers. Purpose/Questions We sought to study the effect of peer-to-peer mentorship on surgeons’ decision-making and on patient care across academic and private adult joint reconstruction practices via the use of group secured messages. Methods From 2013 to 2016, we established a messaging system that was compliant with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) among five previous adult hip and knee reconstruction co-fellows in order to discuss complex cases. Data collected from each case included patient demographics (age and sex), history and physical examination, relevant imaging in orthogonal planes, and preliminary diagnosis and treatment plans. Data collected from group responses included nature of additional inquiries, literature citations, operative recommendations, and sample imaging of similar cases previously treated. Results The group consisted of two private practice surgeons and three academic surgeons. Data was collected on 283 cases discussed during the study period. None of the patients had any HIPAA violations. The mean number of reviewers who commented on a case was 2.4, with at least one response in 97% of cases. In 33% of the cases, the peers confirmed the initial treatment plan, and in 67% of the cases, an alternative treatment plan was recommended and executed. The case distribution was 94 primary and 189 revision procedures, including 173 hips, 103 knees, three ankles, two shoulders, and two pelvises. Conclusion In the majority of cases exchanged between young surgeons via a group messaging system, a significant impact on patient care was appreciated. In a technology-driven era, peer-to-peer advisory for difficult cases via a rapid feedback method may allow for substantial improvement in patient care, particularly for surgeons not practicing at a large academic medical center with access to several partners and multiple opinions.