Background. Total Knee Replacement (TKR) is technically demanding, time consuming and has higher complication rates in super obese (BMI>45) patients. Bariatric surgery can be considered for such patients prior to TKR although its effect on complications is unknown. Methods. All patients who underwent bariatric surgery and a TKR in the NHS in England between 2005 and 2009 were included. Hospital episode statistics data in the form of OPCS, ICD10 codes were used to establish 90-day DVT, PE and mortality rates (inpatient and outpatient). In addition, readmission to orthopaedics, joint revision and ‘return to theatre for infection’ rates were also established. Code strings for each patient were examined in detail to ensure the correct gastric procedures were selected. Fifty-three patients underwent bariatric surgery then TKR (44-1274 days) (group 1). Thirty-one patients underwent TKR then bariatric surgery (33-1398 days) (group 2). Results. In the 53 patients that underwent bariatric surgery first there was 1 DVT, no PE and 1 death at 90 days following knee replacement. There were no orthopaedic readmissions within one year of TKR, no revision at 18 months and no knee washouts for infection. In the 31 patients that underwent TKR first there were no DVT, PE or deaths at 90 days. There were four orthopaedic readmissions (12%) within 30 days of TKR and two infections of the knee replacement. Overall, one-year infection rate and readmission were higher if TKR was performed prior to the bariatric surgery. The statistical analysis is difficult due to small number of patients. Conclusions. This data suggests that timing of bariatric surgery appears to be crucial. Although complication rates appear high in patients who undergo both procedures, performing bariatric surgery first appears to reduce that risk of local complications

The prevalence of Class III Obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m25) in black women is 18%, three times the 6 national average. Class III obesity is associated with mobility limitations, particularly hip joint 7 deterioration. Therefore black women are highly likely to come to the attention of orthopedic 8 surgeons. Weight loss associated with bariatric surgery should lead to enhanced success of hip 9 replacements. However, we present a case of a black woman who underwent Roux-en-y gastric 10 bypass with the expectation that weight loss would improve her ambulation and if necessary 11 make her a better surgical candidate for hip replacement. Her gastric bypass was successful as her BMI declined from 52.0 kg/m2 to 33.7 kg/m212. However, her hip circumference post weight 13 loss remained persistently high. As a consequence, the soft tissue tunnel geometry presented 14 major challenges. The tunnel depth as well as the immobility of the soft tissue envelope 15 interfered with retractor placement, tissue reflection and adequate surgical access to the 16 acetabulum. Therefore a traditional cup placement could not be achieved. Instead, a 17 hemiarthroplasty was performed. Her pre-surgery Harris Hip Score was 17.0. In the first few 18 months post surgery there were improvements, specifically a decrease in pain and a decreased 19 reliance on external support. But her overall functional independence never improved. This case 20 is presented to raise awareness that improved BMI category post bariatric surgery is not 21 sufficient to guarantee that orthopedic risks have been minimized. Overall, weight loss does 22 improve both the metabolic profile and anesthesia risk, but the success rate of total hip 23 arthroplasties will be low if fat mass (i.e. high hip circumference) in the operative field remains 24 high. We are now repeatedly recognizing this problem but are not finding any case reports on 25 this issue. Therefore we provide a practical approach to evaluate these patients and describe 26 ways we have found to successfully address intra-operative challenges

Introduction. Morbid obesity (BMI>40) is a significant risk factor for complications following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). As such many have a restrictive practice of withholding elective primary TJA in the morbidly obese. The purpose of this study was to observe the implications of this practice. Methods. From 2012 to 2014, 289 patients with morbid obesity and end-stage OA of the hip or knee were prospectively followed. At initial visit, patients were given a packet on risks of TJA in the morbidly obese and referral information to a weight loss clinic. Patients were contacted at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months from initial visit for PROs, and BMI changes. The average age of patients was 56 (26.7–79.1) there were 218 females and 71 males. Results. The average BMI at initial visit was 46.9 (39.9–68.2). 85 patients (29%) refused additional follow up or to answer phone surveys regarding their status. 146 patients (50.5%) have not had surgery. Initial BMI in this cohort was 47.4 (39.9–68.6) and at last follow up was 46.8 (28.9–70.8). Of those, 11 (7.5%) had a last follow up BMI≤40. Only 23% of patients went to the bariatric clinic and 13% had bariatric surgery. Fifty-eight patients (20.1%) underwent TJA. BMI at initial visit was 45.3 (40.3–55.4), and at the time of surgery was 41.3 (27.5–69.5). Only 20 patients (6.9% of those followed) have successfully achieved BMI < 40 and had surgery. Of those, 14 (70%) had a last follow up BMI≤40, and 2 (10%) had a last follow up BMI≤30. Conclusions. The practice of restricting total joint replacement to morbidly obese patients does not serve as an incentive to lose weight prior to arthroplasty. Only 20% of patients ultimately underwent TJA and the majority of those remained morbidly obese. Better resources and collaborative care among specialties is required to optimize patients prior to surgery

The following papers will be discussed during this session: 1) Staph Screening and Treatment Prior to Elective TJA; 2) Unfulfilled Expectations Following TJA Procedures; 3) Thigh Pain in Short Stem Cementless Components in THR; 4) Is the Direct Anterior Approach a Risk Factor for Early Failure?; 5) THA Infection - Results of a 2nd 2-Stage Re-implantation - Clinical Trial of Articulating and Static Spacers; 6) THA Revision - Modular vs. Non Modular Fluted Tapered Stems-Total Femoral Replacement for Femoral Bone Loss - Cage + TM Augment vs. Cup Cage for Acetabular Bone Loss; 7) Do Injections Increase the Risk of Infection Prior to TKA?; 8) Long-Acting Opioid Use Predicts Perioperative Complication in TJA; 9) UKA vs. HTO in Patients Under 55 at 5–7 years; 10) Stemming Tibial Component in TKA Patients with a BMI > 30; 11) The Effect of Bariatric Surgery Prior to Total Knee Arthroplasty; 12) Oral Antibiotics and Reinfection Following Two-Stage Exchange; 13) Two-Stage Debridement with Prosthetic Retention for Acute TKA Infections; 14) Patient-Reported Outcomes Predict Meaningful Improvement after TKA; 15) Contemporary Rotating Hinge TKA; 16) Liposomal Bupivacaine in TKA; and 17) Noise Generation in Modern TKA: Incidence and Significance

Obesity is a leading public health concern and it is increasing in prevalence over the last 20 years. Obesity prevalence has doubled in adults and tripled in adolescents. The United States is the leading country in terms of percent obesity. Most alarming is the fact that the fastest growing rates of obesity are in the highest BMI groups. The issue of obesity is a particular concern to arthroplasty surgeons since there is an association between the increasing incidence of obesity and the increasing rate of joint replacement. Also of concern is that obese patients tend to be younger and complication rates and revision rates are higher in young patients which is only compounded by the presence of obesity. The risk of virtually every major complication is substantially higher in obese patients. Of concern, however, is a recent study indicating that bariatric surgery with successful weight loss does not necessarily decrease the complication rate. Obesity is also associated with substantially higher costs. There is some evidence that obesity doesn't necessarily affect implant survival. There is also evidence that the clinical outcomes may not be substantially compromised by the presence of obesity. Based on data from studies such as this, some centers have stated that it is difficult to justify withholding surgery based on BMI alone. The data on weight loss following surgery indicates the vast majority of patients did not lose weight following joint replacement. In one study a higher proportion of patients gained weight than lost weight

Outcomes of THA after Hip Arthroscopy. Hip Injections and Rapidly Progressing Joint Degeneration. Procedure Duration Wound Complications & LOS. Losing Weight Following TKA and its Influence on Outcome. Radiographic Severity of Arthritis & Patient Satisfaction in TKA. Intra-wound Vancomycin Powder Reduces Infections in TJA. Increased Non-stemmed Tibial Failures with BMI ≥ 35. Influence of Component Alignment on Outcome in Varus TKA. New TKA Designs - Do Patients Notice?. Bariatric Surgery Prior to TKA Associated with Fewer Complication. Metal Sensitivity Correlates with Pain in Patients with TJA. Blood Culture Bottles vs. Swabs for Microbial Detection in PJI. I&D Prior to 2 Stage Revision TKA Doesn't Increase Risk of Failure. Outpatient Total Joint Leads to Substantial Burden of Phone Calls. Wear and lysis of HXL Sockets: Effect of Head Size @ 10–14 Years. Surface Finish & Survivorship of Cemented Stems in THA. Patient Reported Outcome as a Tool for Appropriateness in THA. Neuraxial Anesthesia and Post-op Complications and Transfusions

In the USA, 34.9% of adults are currently obese (BMI > 30). Growth in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is outpacing growth in total hip arthroplasty (THA) largely due to a differential utilization of TKA in overweight patients in the USA. In a recent study, 54.5% of patients reporting to arthroplasty clinics in the USA were obese. From 2006–2010, 61.2% of primary unilateral TKA patients in the USA ACS-NSQIP database were obese. Arthroplasty surgeons are directly affected by the obesity epidemic and need to understand how to safely offer a range of peri-operative care for these patients in order to insure good clinical outcomes. Pre-operative care for the obese patient involves nutritional counseling, weight loss methods, consideration for bariatric surgery, physical therapy, metabolic workup, and diagnosis and management of frequent comorbid conditions (OSA, DM2, HTN, HLD). Obese patients must also be counseled on their increased risk of complications following TKA. In the operating room, several steps can be taken to insure success when performing TKA on obese patients. We recommend performing TKA without the use of a tourniquet in order to prevent fat necrosis and increased pain. The incision is made in 90 degrees of knee flexion, atypically midline proximally and curved distally to the midpoint between the tubercle and the medial edge of the tibia. Care is used to minimise the creation of dead space, and the approach to the knee is an extensile medial parapatellar incision. Closure is in multiple layers. The use of negative pressure dressing following surgery can minimise the early wound drainage that is frequently seen after TKA in obese patients. Post-operative care of the obese patient following TKA involves several unique considerations. Chronic pain and obesity are frequent comorbid conditions and post-operative pain control regimens need to be tailored. Although the physical therapy regimen does not differ in obese patients, obese patients are more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility. Obese patients have a higher rate of all complications compared to healthy weight. All infection and deep infection increased in obese patients in large meta-analysis. Patients with BMI > 35 are 6.7 times more likely to develop infection after TKA. Patients with BMI > 40 have a 3.35 times higher rate of revision for deep infection than those with BMI < 35. The odds ratio for major complications increases dramatically beyond BMI > 45. Although there are a few studies that have demonstrated worse clinical outcome in obese patients following TKA, most studies show no difference in clinical outcomes at short- or long-term follow-up. The arthroplasty surgeon must optimise the obese patient prior to surgery, use intra-operative techniques to maximise success, and anticipate potential problems in the post-operative course in order to achieve success with TKA in obese patients

What are the data on obesity and THA risk? Which complications are elevated? If you decide on surgery, how can you minimise complications? These are timely questions because the rates of obesity are rising in the US and in many other parts of the world. Does obesity increase risk of THA complications? Answer: yes: at least for some complications. Complications which are increased: infection, wound healing, nerve injury; possibly: dislocation, periprosthetic fractures. The data are mixed on whether aseptic loosening and/or bearing surface wear problems are increased in the obese. Higher BMI may be offset by lower activity levels, particularly in a congruent joint such as the hip. Outcomes of THA in obese: Lower function scores and activity scores compared to nonobese. But good pain relief and the preoperative to postoperative change in functional scores is similar to non-obese. Is there a critical BMI threshold above which complications become unacceptable? Several studies show BMI ≥40 associated with strong risk of complications. One study from Mayo Clinic on patients with BMI ≥50 showed a 39% surgical complication rate, a 12% medical complication rate, and a high mortality rate in the several years after THA. Individualise operative decisions based on risk/benefit analysis for each patient. If you decide to operate, how can you minimise risk? Lose weight before surgery by diet: often ineffective, but worth trying. Lose weight before THA with bariatric surgery: effective in producing weight loss, but beware of the “malnourished” obese patient. In surgery: care with patient positioning, sufficient incision length, greater exposure, avoid sciatic nerve injury, fractures, care with acetabular component positioning, extra drains in subcutaneous tissue and wound compression. Engage patient in discussion of risks/benefits before surgery: shared decision making

Weight loss is commonly recommended as a treatment for back pain. However, there is little literature to support this. A recent systematic review has identified only studies relating to bariatric surgery. There are no other studies that address whether weight loss improves back pain. Forty-five consecutive consenting patients were recruited following enrolment in a tertiary multidisciplinary weight management program. These patients were referred primarily for treatment of obesity. The program consisted of consultation and on-going supervision by a sub-specialty weight management physician, and group and individual sessions addressing diet, exercise and behaviour modification. Patients were assessed by independent observers prior to start of program and at twelve weeks into the program with standardised and validated outcomes tools measuring baseline factors, back pain and related functional disability at twelve weeks follow-up. Prior to starting the program, forty-two patients (93%) reported some degree of low back pain of which 40% rated their pain as moderate (n = 12) or severe (n = 6). Using the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index, 73% patients reported moderate (n = 18) or severe disability (n = 15). At twelve weeks, thirty-seven (82%) patients were available for assessment. There were significant improvement in VAS pain scores (mean change = 1.5, 95% CI: 0.7 to 2.4) and in Oswestry Low Back Disability Index (mean change= 8.6, 95% CI: 3.9 to 13.2). There were significant reductions in the prevalence of moderate or severe back pain (p = 0.04) and moderate or severe disability (p = 0.007) in the entire group. This is the first study to provide empirical evidence on the positive effects of a weight loss program on back pain. These results lay the groundwork for longer follow-up and comparative studies

Aims

We studied the outcomes of hip and knee arthroplasties in a high-volume arthroplasty centre to determine if patients with morbid obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m²) had unacceptably worse outcomes as compared to those with BMI < 40 kg/m².

Obesity is a global epidemic of 2.1 billion people and a well known cause of osteoarthritis. Joint replacement in the obese attracts more complications, poorer outcomes and higher revision rates. It is a reversible condition and the fundamental principles of dealing with reversible medical conditions prior to elective total joint replacement should apply to obesity. The dilemma for orthopaedic surgeons is when to offer surgery in the face of a reversible condition, which if treated may obviate joint replacement and reduce the risk and severity of obesity related disease in both the medical arena and the field of orthopaedics.

The April 2013 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: smuggling spinal implants; local bone graft and PLIF; predicting disability with slipped discs; mortality and spinal surgery; spondyloarthropathy; brachytherapy; and fibrin mesh and BMP.

The global economy has been facing a financial crisis. Healthcare costs are spiraling, and there is a projected £30 billion health funding gap by 2020 in the UK.¹ This has prompted a drive for efficiency in healthcare provision in the UK, and in 2012, the Health and Social Care Act was introduced, heralding a fundamental change to the structure of the National Health Service, especially in the way that healthcare is funded in England.²

What is happening in the UK is a reflection of a global problem. Rationing of healthcare is a topic of much discussion; as unless spending is capped, providing healthcare will become unsustainable. Who decides how money is spent, and which services should be rationed?

In this article we aim to discuss the impact that rationing may have on orthopaedic surgery, and we will discuss our own experiences of attempts to ration local services.³ We also seek to inform and educate the general orthopaedic community on this topic.

Objectives

To review the current best surgical practice and detail a multi-disciplinary approach that could further reduce joint replacement infection.