Mayman, David J.

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: Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces bleeding and the need for transfusion after total knee arthroplasty. Most literature has focused on intravenous (IV) administration of TXA, with less data available on the efficacy of topically administered TXA. This multicenter randomized clinical trial specifically assessed the efficacy of topical TXA compared with IV TXA as measured by calculated blood loss, drain output, and transfusion rates. Complications, including venous thromboembolism (VTE), were reported. Methods: A total of 640 patients who underwent primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis at 2 large academic centers were randomized to receive 1 g of IV TXA prior to tourniquet inflation and 1 g at closure, or 3 g of TXA diluted in 45 mL of normal saline solution (total volume of 75 mL) and topically applied after cementation. Age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and preoperative hemoglobin level were similar between the groups. Univariate, multiple linear regression, and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: Patients who received topical TXA had significantly greater calculated blood loss compared with those who received IV TXA (mean of 324 compared with 271 mL; p = 0.005). Drain output was significantly higher in the topical TXA group compared with the IV TXA group (mean of 560 compared with 456 mL; p < 0.0001). The rate of transfusion was low in the topical and IV groups, with no significant difference on univariate analysis (1.6% compared with 0.6%, respectively; p = 0.45); however, on multiple logistic regression analysis, patients who received topical TXA were 2.2-fold more likely to receive a transfusion (p < 0.0001). The topical and IV TXA groups did not differ significantly with respect to the rate of thrombotic events (0.6% compared with 1.6%, respectively; p = 0.45). Conclusions: In this large, randomized clinical trial involving patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, both IV and topical TXA were associated with a low rate of transfusion. While IV TXA was associated with less calculated blood loss, lower drain output, and fewer transfusions, the small differences between the groups may not be clinically important. Given the low prevalence of thrombotic complications, the relative safety of one formulation of TXA over the other cannot be definitely established. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.