Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Introduction. The vast majority of orthopaedic surgeons use C-arm fluoroscopy in the operating theatre when building a circular external fixator. In the absence of previous research in this area, we hypothesised that the surgeon who builds a circular external fixator is exposed to a greater amount of radiation purely as a result of the presence of the metallic fixator in the x-ray beam. The aim of our study therefore was to investigate how the presence of a circular external fixator affects the radiation dose to the surgeon and the surgical assistant. Materials & Methods. A simulated environment was created using a radiolucent operating table, an acrylic lower limb phantom (below knee segment), various configurations of metalic circular external fixation, and a standard size C-arm image intensifier. The variables investigated were 1. the amount of metal in the beam 2. the orientation of the beam (PA vertical vs lateral) 3. the horizonal distance of the person from the beam (surgeon vs assistant) and 4. the vertical distance of the various body parts from the beam (e.g. thyroid, groin). In terms of radiation dose, we recorded two things : 1. the dose produced by the image intensifier 2. the dose rate at standardised positions in the operating theatre. The latter was done using a solid-state survey sensor. These positions represented both where the surgeon and surgical assistant typically stand plus the heights of their various body regions relative to the operating table. Results. The effect of the presence of the circular external fixator : all frame constructs tested resulted in a statistically significant greater radiation dose both produced by the image intensifier and received by the surgical team. The effect of the beam orientation : the PA (vertical) orientation resulted in a statistically significant greater radiation dose for the surgeon than did the lateral orientation, but made no difference for the assistant. The effect of horizontal distance from the beam : unsurprisingly, the surgeon (who was closer to the beam) received a statistically significant greater radiation dose than the assistant. The effect of vertical distance from the beam : for the surgeon, the dose received was highest at the level of the phantom leg / frame, whilst for the assistant there was no statistically significant difference for any level. Conclusions. To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the radiation dose rate to the orthopaedic surgeon when building a circular external fixator. We found that the surgeon does indeed receive a ‘double whammy’ because the image intensifier puts out a greater amount of radiation plus the metalic frame scatters more of the x-ray beam. Whilst the amounts are relatively small, we think that it's important to quantify doses that orthopaedic surgeons receive to ensure optimal radiation practices

Deep infection is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship between surgeon volume and the incidence of revision for infection after primary TKA. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from 1 September 1999 to 31 December 2020 for primary TKA for osteoarthritis that were revised for infection. Surgeon volume was defined by the number of primary TKA procedures performed by the surgeon in the year the primary TKA was performed and grouped as <25, 25-49, 50-74, 75-99, >100 primary TKA procedures per year. Kaplan Meir estimates for cumulative percent revision (CPR) and Cox Proportional Hazard Ratios were performed to compare rates of revision for infection by surgeon volume, with sub-analyses for patella and polyethylene use, age <65 years and male gender. 5295 of 602,919 primary TKA for osteoarthritis were revised for infection. High volume surgeons (>100 TKA/year) had a significantly lower rate of revision for infection with a CPR at 1 and 17 years of 0.4% (95% CI 0.3, 0.4) and 1.5% (95% CI 1.2, 2.0), respectively, compared with 0.6% (95% CI 0.5, 0.7) and 2.1% (95% CI 1.8, 2.3), respectively, for low volume surgeons (<25 TKR/year). Differences between the high-volume group and the remaining groups remained when sub-analysis for age, gender, ASA, BMI, patella resurfacing and the use of cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE). High volume surgeons have lower rates of revision for infection in primary TKA

Introduction. Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) can be managed through a variety of different surgical approaches from closed reduction to simple tenotomies of the adductors and through to osteotomies of the femur and pelvis. The rate of redislocation following open reduction for the treatment of DDH may be affected by the number of intraoperative surgeons. Materials and methods. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 109 patients who underwent open reduction with or without bony osteotomies as a primary intervention between 2013 and 2023. We measured the number of redislocations and number of operating surgeons (either 1 or 2 operating surgeons) to assess for any correlation. 109 patients were identified and corresponded to 121 primary hip operations, the mean age at operation was 82.2 months (range 6 to 739 months). During the 10-year period 7 hip redislocations were identified. Results. Of the 7 redislocated hips, the rate of redislocation was found to be higher in patients who had undergone surgery via a single surgeon (5 redislocations) compared to the dual surgeon cohort (2 redislocations), though this did not reach statistical significance. Redislocation was more common in female patients and right laterality 7.2% and 8.7% respectively, though this again did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions. We conclude that a single surgeon approach, female gender and right laterality are potential risk factors for redislocation following open reduction. Further investigation utilising a larger sample size would be required to appropriately explore these potential risk factors further

Introduction. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a physically demanding procedure where the surgeon is subject to fatigue with increased energy expenditure comparable to exercise[1]. Robotic technologies have been introduced into operating rooms to assist surgeons with ergonomically challenging tasks and to reduce overall physical stress and fatigue[2]. Greater exposure to robotic assisted training may create efficiencies that may reduce energy expenditure[3]. The purpose of this study was to assess surgeon energy expenditure during THA and perceived mental and physical demand. Methods. 12 THAs (6 cadavers) randomized by BMI were performed by two surgeons with different robotic assisted experience. Surgeon 1 (S1) had performed over 20 robotic assisted THAs on live patients and Surgeon 2 (S2) had training on 1 cadaver with no patient experience. For each cadaver, laterality was randomized and manual total hip arthroplasty (MTHA) was performed first on one hip and robotic assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) on the contralateral hip. A biometric shirt collected surgeon data on caloric energy expenditure (CEE) throughout acetabular reaming (AR) and acetabular implantation (AI) for each THA procedure. Surgeon mental and physical demand was assessed after each surgery. Scores were reported from 1–10, with 10 indicating high demand. A paired sample t-test was performed between MTHA and RATHA within each surgeon group with a confidence interval of (α =0.05). Results. Each surgeon demonstrated greater CEE during MTHA, Figure 1. Surgeon CEE during MTHA was greater for S1(100±28.1 cals) compared to RATHA(83.5±0.34 cals), with no significant difference (p>0.05, p=0.49). Energy expenditure was greater for S2 during MTHA(83.5±16.3 cals) compared to RATHA(75.3±0.71 cals) with no significance (p>0.05, p=0.68). RATHA resulted in a decrease in average CEE for each surgeon with a reduction of 16.5% for S1 and 9.8 % for S2. Surgeon task time during MTHA was greater for S1(14.7±3.2 mins) compared to RATHA(12.3±4.93 mins), with no significance (p>0.05, p=0.46). Average task time was greater for S2 during MTHA(10.0±2.65 mins) compared to RATHA(8.7±2.89 mins) with no significant differences (p>0.05, p=0.66). Average mental and physical demand was less for RATHA compared to MTHA, Figure 2. Average physical demand reported during AR for MTHA(5.5±1.2) was greater than RATHA(4.3±2.0, p=0.08). Average physical demand was greater for AI for MTHA(6±1.3) than RATHA(3.7±2.1, p=0.29). Average mental demand was significantly greater during AR for MTHA(5.7±1.03) when compared to RATHA(3.2±1.5, p=0.007). Average mental demand was greater during AI for MTHA(6.2±1.2) than RATHA(2.3±1.5, p=0.051). Conclusion. Regardless of prior surgical experience, both surgeons had reduced caloric expenditure when performing RATHA as compared to MTHA. For the surgeon with more RATHA experience, there was a greater percent reduction in caloric expenditure between surgical interventions. Both surgeons had similar percent reductions in time for RATHA compared to MTHA. Each surgeon noted increased mental and physical demand during MTHA. The trends suggest RATHA may reduce surgeon energy expenditure and time to perform acetabular reaming and implant insertion for THA. The pilot data suggests that there may be a relationship between energy expenditure and surgeon experience. This could be explored in future studies with a larger surgeon population. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Strategy regarding patella resurfacing in total knee replacement (TKR) remains controversial. TKR revision rates are reportedly influenced by surgeon procedure volume. The study aim was to compare revision outcomes of TKR with and without patella resurfacing in different surgeon volume groups using data from the AOANJRR. The study population included 571,149 primary TKRs for osteoarthritis. Surgeons were classified as low, medium, or high-volume based on the quartiles of mean primary TKR volume between 2011 and 2020. Cumulative percent revision (CPR) using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship were calculated for the three surgeon volume groups with and without patella resurfacing. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age and sex, were used to compare revision risks. High-volume surgeons who did not resurface the patella had the highest all-cause CPR (20-year CPR 10.9%, 95% CI [10.0%, 12.0%]). When the patella was resurfaced, high-volume surgeons had the lowest revision rate (7.3%, 95% CI [6.4%, 8.4%]). When the high-volume groups were compared there was a higher rate of revision for the non-resurfaced group after 6 months. When the medium-volume surgeon groups were compared, not resurfacing the patella also was associated with a higher rate of revision after 3 months. The low-volume comparisons showed an initial higher rate of revision with patella resurfacing, but there was no difference after 3 months. When only patella revisions were considered, there were higher rates of revision in all three volume groups where the patella was not resurfaced. TKR performed by high and medium-volume surgeons without patella resurfacing had higher revision rates compared to when the patella was resurfaced. Resurfacing the patella in the primary procedure protected against revision for patella reasons in all surgeon volume groups. Level of evidence: III (National registry analysis)

Aim. There is a constant increase of total joint arthroplasties to improve the quality of life of an aging population. Prosthetic-joint infections are rare, with an incidence of 1–2%, but they represent serious complications in terms of morbidity and mortality. Different therapeutic options exist, but the role of the surgeon's experience has never been investigated. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the infection eradication success rate depending on the involvement of a septic surgeon. Method. Patients having a prosthetic-joint infection at Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) between 2006 and 2018 were included. The success rate depending on type of surgeon (septic vs non-septic) and type of surgical procedure was analyzed. Results. 444 patients (61% hips, 37% knees) were identified with a median age of 70 years. The overall success rate was 83% for septic surgeons compared to 61% for non-septic surgeons (p < 0.05). The effect of the surgeon was predominant in debridement with retention of the prosthesis where the experience could improve the success rate from 43% (non-septic) to 75% (septic) (p < 0.05). Conclusions. The involvement of a septic surgeon is associated with a significantly higher success rate, suggesting surgical experience is an important factor in treating prosthetic-joint infections

Introduction. Reverse shoulder Arthroplasty is a successful treatment for gleno-humeral osteoarthritis. However, components loosening and painful prostheses, related to components wrong positioning, are still a problem for those patients who underwent this kind of surgery. Several new technology has been developed the improve the implant positioning. CT-based intraoperative navigation system is a suitable technology that allow the surgeon to prepare the implant site exactly as planned with preoperative software. Method. Thirty reverse shoulder prostheses were performed at Modena Polyclinic using GPS CT-based intraoperative navigation system (Exactech, Gainsville, Florida). Walch classification was used to assess glenoid type. Planned version and inclination of the glenoid component, planned seating, final version and inclination of the reamer were recorded. Intraoperative and perioperative complication were recorded. Planned positioning was conducted aiming to the maximum seating, avoiding retroversion >10° and superior inclination. Results. Eight patients were male, 22 were female. Mean age was 75 years old (range 58–87). 4 glenoid were type B3, four were B2, 10 cases were B1, 12 case were A1/A2. Posterior or superior augment was used in 15 cases. Mean planned seating was 93%. Mean preoperative version was -7.5±6.9°; Mean planned version was -2±2.8°; Mean intraoperative measured version was -1.9±2.8°; no statistical difference was found between planned and intraoperative version (p=0.16). Mean preoperative inclination was 1.8±6.°; Mean planned inclination was -2.2±2.4°; Mean intraoperative measured inclination was -2.1.9±2.3°; no statistical difference was found between planned and intraoperative version or inclination (respectively p=0.16 and p=0.32). Mean surgical time was 71 minute (range 51–82). Three cases of coracoid ruptures were reported, 1 failure of the system occurred. Discussion. GPS navigation system allows the surgeon to prepare the implant site as planned on Preoperative software in Reverse shoulder arthroplasty, with no statistical difference between planned orientation and intraoperative measured orientation. That means that even in the most difficult cases the surgeon is able to find a good positioning (93% seating)and to replicate it in the operative room. Only one failure of the system occurred, because too much time was passed between CT scan and surgery (9 months). Three coracoid fractures occurred in the first 10 cases: these could be addressed to a lack of confidence with the double lateralization of this prosthesis which increase tensioning on the coracoid and a lack of confidence in tracker positioning, which should be made as proximal as it is possible. Finally, the system needs several improvements to be considered a breakthrough technology, such as humeral component positioning and final control of the implant, but by now is a useful way to improve our surgery, especially in difficult cases

Introduction. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a commonly performed procedure to relieve arthritis or traumatic injury. However, implant failure can occur from implant loosening or crevice corrosion as a result of inadequate seating of the femoral head onto the stem during implantation. There is no consensus—either by manufacturers or by the surgical community—on what head/stem assembly procedure should be used to maximize modular junction stability. Furthermore, the role of “off-axis” loads—loads not aligned with the stem taper axis—during assembly may significantly affect modular junction stability, but has not been sufficiently evaluated. Objective. The objective of this study was to measure the three-dimensional (3D) head/stem assembly loads considering material choice—metal or ceramic—and the surgeon experience level. Methods. A total of 29 surgeons of varying levels (Attending, Fellow, Resident) were recruited and asked to perform a benchtop, head/stem assembly using an instrumented apparatus simulating a procedure in the operating room (Figure 1). The apparatus comprised of a 12/14 stem taper attached to a 3D load sensor (9347C, Kistler® USA, Amherst, NY). Surgeons were randomly assigned a metal or ceramic femoral head and instructed to assemble the taper using their preferred surgical technique. This procedure was repeated five times. Surgeons were brought back to test the opposite material after four weeks. Output 3D load data was analyzed for differences in peak vertical load applied, angle of deviation from the stem axis—termed off-axis angle, variability between trials, and impaction location. Results. Preliminary results suggest no significant differences between the loads applied to the metal heads and the ceramic heads. Across the two materials tested, both attendings and residents applied greater loads than fellows (p=0.33; Residents=9.0 kN vs Fellow=7.2 kN: p=0.27; Attendings=8.9 kN vs 7.2 kN) with significantly less variability (Attendings: σ= 1.58; Fellows: σ= 3.26; Residents: σ= 2.86). Attending surgeons also exhibited applied loads at significantly lower off-axis angles compared to fellows (p=0.01; 4.6° vs Fellow=7.2°) (Figure 2). However, all of our clinicians assembled ceramic head tapers with a greater off-axis angle as compared to assembling metal heads. In addition, metal heads were impacted more on-axis for all surgeon experience levels (Figure 3). While the impaction load plots suggest that the first impact strike is the most crucial for head stability, it was determined that the number of strikes is not as important as the maximum impaction load applied. Conclusion. Differences in impaction load when assembling metal and ceramic femoral heads were not apparent; however, variability of technique and load was observed across the different surgical experience levels as well as within surgeons of the same level. Understanding assembly mechanics and surgical habits for THA will provide insight to the best assembly procedures for these implants. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is among the most successful interventions in all of medicine and has recently been termed “The Operation of the Century”. Charnley originally stated that “Objectives must be reasonable. Neither surgeons nor engineers will ever make an artificial hip joint that will last 30 years and at some time in this period enable the patient to play football.” and he defined an appropriate patient as generally being over 65 years of age. Hip rating scales developed during this time were consistent with this approach and only required relief of pain and return to normal activities of daily living to achieve a perfect score. Since this time, however, hip arthroplasty has been applied to high numbers of younger, more active individuals and patient expectations have increased. One recent study showed that in spite of a good hip score, only 43% of patients had all of their expectations completely fulfilled following THA. The current generation metal-metal hip surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) has been suggested as an alternative to standard THA which may offer advantages to patients including retention of more native bone, less stress shielding, less thigh pain due to absence of a stem, less limb length discrepancy, and a higher activity level. A recent technology review by the AAOS determined that currently available literature was inadequate to verify any of these suggested potential benefits. The potential complications associated with SRA have been well documented recently. The indications are narrower, the implant is more expensive, the technique is more demanding and less forgiving, and the results are both highly product and surgeon specific. Unless a clinical advantage in the level of function of SRA over THA can be demonstrated, continued enthusiasm for this technique is hard to justify. To generate data on the level of function of younger more active arthroplasty patients, a national multicenter survey was conducted by an independent university medical interviewing center with a long track record of conducting state and federal medical surveys. All patients were under 60, high demand (pre-morbid UCLA score > 6) and had received a cementless stem with an advanced bearing surface or an SRA at one of five major total joint centers throughout the country. The detailed questionnaire quantified symptoms and function related to employment, recreation, and sexual function. Patients with SRA had a higher incidence of noises emanating from the hip than other bearing surfaces although this was transient and asymptomatic. SRA patients were much more likely to have less thigh pain than THA, less likely to limp, less likely to perceive a limb length difference, more likely to run for exercise, and more likely to run longer distances. In another study of over 400 THA and SRA patients at two major academic centers, patients completed pain drawings that revealed an equivalent incidence of groin pain between THA and SRA, but an incidence of thigh pain in THA that was three times higher than in SRA in young active patients. While some or most of the observed advantages of SRA over THA may be attributable to some degree of selection bias, the inescapable conclusion is that SRA patients are demonstrating clinical advantages that warrants continued utilization and investigation of this procedure

Patient specific instrumentation (PSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may improve component position and sizing. However, little has been reported about the accuracy of the default plan created by the manufacturer. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the reliability of the manufacturer plan and the impact of surgeon's changes on the final accuracy of the cutting guide sizes. The planned sizes of 45 TKAs were prospectively recorded from the in the initial manufacturer's proposal and from the final plan modified after surgeon's evaluation and compared to the actually implanted sizes. The manufacturer's initial proposal differed from the final implant in 20% of the femoral and 51.11% of the tibial components, while the surgeon's plan in 13.33% of the femoral and 26.67% of the tibial components. Surgeon's modifications in the pre-operative were carried out for 11.11% of the femoral components and 51.11% of the tibial ones (p = 0.0299). Appropriate modification occurred in of 88% and 76% of femoral and tibial changes respectively. The surgeon's accuracy to predict the final component size was significantly different from that of the manufacturer and changes on the manufacturer's plan were necessary to get an accurate preoperative plan of the implant sizes. Careful evaluation by an experienced knee surgeon is mandatory when planning TKA with PSI. Collaboration between surgeons and manufacturers may help obtain improved accuracy in PSI size planning

The high and ever increasing cost of medical care worldwide has driven a trend toward new payment models. Event based models (such as bundled payment for surgical events) have shown a greater potential for care and cost improvement than population-based models (such as accountable care organizations). Since joint replacement is among the most frequent and costly surgical events in medicine, bundled payments for joint replacement episodes have been at the forefront of evolution from fee-for-service to value-based care models and episode-based healthcare reform in general. Our education as surgeons in medical school, residency, fellowship, and in continuing education has been almost entirely non-economic in focus. Yet, we surgeons are now evolving from being primarily responsive for our patients' medical care to being also responsible for all expenditures associated with our patients' care. Similarly, while the cost of our patients' care was not even available to us, every dollar of expenditure for a patient's episode of care is now available to us in some circumstances. For example, a typical primary joint replacement episode may cost $30,000 for a patient insured by Medicare in the US. A surgeon performing 400 joint replacements per year is therefore authorizing upwards of $12M a year in health care spending by making the decisions to perform reconstructive procedures on those patients. The risk for value-based surgical episodes of care can be born by various entities including hospital systems or the surgeons themselves. Recent evidence demonstrates that quality improves and cost decreases more rapidly when surgeons take primary responsibility and risk for episodes of care as compared to when a hospital system or third party takes primary responsibility and risk. Yet, as surgeons, our education in the field of medical economics, value-based episodes of care, and payment reform is only just beginning. The more we understand about the cost and value of the services that we order for our patients, the more leadership can provide as healthcare evolves. The current presentation will describe the specific cost of care for the primary joint replacement patient preliminary experience with accepting risk and responsibility for these patients. It is likely that our patients will be best served if we surgeons provide as much leadership as possible in their care, both medically and economically

Total hip arthroplasty is among the most successful interventions in all of medicine and has recently been termed “The Operation of the Century”. Charnley originally stated that “Objectives must be reasonable. Neither surgeons nor engineers will ever make an artificial hip joint that will last 30 years and at some time in this period enable the patient to play football.” and he defined appropriate patient as generally being over 65 years of age. Hip rating scales developed during this time were consistent with this approach and only required relief of pain and return to normal activities of daily living to achieve a perfect score. Since this time, however, hip arthroplasty has been applied to high numbers of younger, more active individuals and patient expectations have increased. One recent study showed that in spite of a good hip score, only 43% of patients had all of their expectations completely fulfilled following THA. The current generation metal-metal hip surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) has been suggested as an alternative to standard THA which may offer advantages to patients including retention of more native bone, less stress shielding, less thigh pain due to absence of a stem, less limb length discrepancy, and a higher activity level. A recent technology review by the AAOS determined that currently available literature was inadequate to verify any of these suggested potential benefits. The potential complications associated with SRA have been well documented recently. The indications are narrower, the implant is more expensive, the technique is more demanding and less forgiving, and the results are both highly product and surgeon specific. Unless a clinical advantage in the level of function of SRA over THA can be demonstrated, continued enthusiasm for this technique is hard to justify. To generate data on the level of function of younger more active arthroplasty patients, a national multicenter survey was conducted by an independent university medical interviewing center with a long track record of conducting state and federal medical surveys. All patients were under 60, high demand (pre-morbid UCLA score > 6) and had received a cementless stem with an advanced bearing surface or an SRA at one of five major total joint centers throughout the country. The detailed questionnaire quantified symptoms and function related to employment, recreation, and sexual function. Patients with SRA had a higher incidence of noises emanating from the hip than other bearing surfaces although this was transient and asymptomatic. SRA patients were much more likely to have less thigh pain than THA, less likely to limp, less likely to perceive a limb length difference, more likely to run for exercise, and more likely to run longer distances. In another study of over 400 THA and SRA patients at two major academic centers, patients completed pain drawings that revealed an equivalent incidence of groin pain between THA and SRA, but an incidence of thigh pain in THA that was three times higher than in SRA in young active patients. While some or most of the observed advantages of SRA over THA may be attributable to some degree of selection bias, the inescapable conclusion is that SRA patients are demonstrating clinical advantages that warrants continued utilisation and investigation of this procedure

INTRODUCTION. Studies have reported that only 70–80% of the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cases using conventional instruments can achieve satisfactory alignment (within ±3° of the mechanical axis). Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been shown to offer increased accuracy and precision to the bony resections compared to conventional techniques [1]. As the early adopters champion the technology, reservation may exist among new CAOS users regarding the ability of achieving the same results. The purpose of this study was to investigate if there are immediate benefits in the accuracy and precision of achieving surgical goals for the novice surgeons, as compared to the experienced surgeons, by using a contemporary CAOS system. Materials and Methods. Two groups of surgeons were randomly selected from TKAs between October 2012 and January 2016 using a CAOS system (ExactechGPS, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR), including:. Novice group (7 surgeons): no navigation experience prior to the adoption of the system and have performed ≤20 CAOS TKAs. To investigate the intra-group variation, this group was further divided into surgeons with extensive experience in conventional TKA (novice-senior), and surgeons who were less experienced (novice-junior). Experiences group (6 surgeons): used the CAOS system for more than 150 TKAs. All the surgeries from the novice group (86 cases) and the most recent 20 cases from each surgeon in the experienced group (120 cases) were studied. Deviations in the resection parameters between the following were investigated for both tibia and femur: 1) planned resection, resection goals defined prior to the bone cuts; 2) checked resection, digitization of the realized bone cuts. The deviations were compared within the novice group (novice-senior vs novice-junior), as well as between the novice and experience groups. Knees with optimal resection (deviation<2°/mm, without clinically alter the joint mechanics [2]) and acceptable resection (deviation<3°/mm, as commonly adopted) were identified. Significance was defined as p<0.05. Results. A summary of the deviations is presented in Table 1. No statistical differences were found between the senior and the junior surgeons in the novice group. Similarly, no differences were found between the experienced group and novice group, except for that the cases in the novice group tended to resect slightly more bone in the tibia (p<0.01), and had slightly larger standard deviations compared to the experienced group. The experienced and novice groups had comparable, high percentages of the knees in both the optimal and acceptable categories (Fig 1). Discussion. This study demonstrated that regardless of the surgeon's experience with TKA, new adoption of the CAOS system investigated can immediately benefit the accuracy and precision of the bony resections at a comparable level with experience CAOS users. Although significant difference was found between novice and experienced groups in tibial resection depth, the difference (0.57mm) was clinically irrelevant. The CAOS system offers substantial reduction of the outliers compared to TKAs performed with conventional instruments [3]

Summary. There is tremendous variability amongst surgeons' ability to reference anatomic landmarks. This may suggest the necessity of other objective methods in determining femoral alignment and rotation. Introduction. Despite the durability of total knee arthroplasty, there is much room for improvement with regards to functional outcome and patient satisfaction. One important factor contributing to poor outcomes after TKA is malrotation of the femoral component. It has been postulated that this is due to failure of surgeons to correctly reference bony landmarks, principally the femoral epicondyles, however, this is unproven. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of joint surgeons and trainees in identifying anatomic landmarks for positioning the femoral component and to determine the effect of prior training and experience. Methods. 23 surgeons (17 attending surgeons, 6 trainees) participated in this study. Using custom-made computer software, each surgeon interactively defined the epicondylar axis (EA), the anterior-posterior axis (AP) of the distal cut (Whiteside's Line) on 3D computer models of 10 normal femora reconstructed from CT scans. Each surgeon then aligned a standard distal cutting guide on the resected distal surface of each femoral model. A standardized procedure was employed to determine the true location of the epicondyles, the direction of Whiteside's Line and the orientation of the cutting guide. Each participant was surveyed to ascertain their extent of formal training in joint arthroplasty, their annual volume of TKA cases, and whether they routinely aligned their TKAs using Whiteside's and the transepicondylar axis. The difference between the ideal and surgeon-selected parameters were calculated and correlated with data describing each surgeon's training and experience. Results. Landmark selection and guide placement was highly variable between surgeons. Overall, surgeons placed Whiteside's line in 1.83°± 7.01° of internal rotation vs. the calculated axes. Additionally, surgeons placed the transepicondylar axis in 1.40°± 3.72° of internal rotation vs. the calculated axes. On average, the guide was placed in 1.44°± 2.59° of additional internal rotation in comparison to the selected transepicondylar axis. Surgeons who routinely utilized the transepicondylar axis intraoperatively placed the guide significantly closer to the selected transepicondylar axis than those who did not (0.74°± 1.28° vs. 1.85°± 3.05°, p=.0024). Surprisingly, fellowship training, years of training, and volume of cases per year had no statistical effect the outcome of placement. Conclusion. This study suggests that there is tremendous variability amongst surgeons' ability to accurately reference the femoral epicondyles, Whiteside's line, and the transepicondylar axis. Our results also indicate that surgeons are not able to identify Whiteside's line with sufficient reliability for it to be a dependable indicator of correct component alignment in TKA. Our data also support the use of other methods to reliably determine correct rotational alignment of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty

Surface replacement of the hip was established in the 1970's as a bone preserving alternative to total hip replacement. However, problems with femoral neck fracture, osteolysis, and component loosening led to early failures and an abandonment of the procedure. The modern generation of hip resurfacing, however, has improved upon past results with new implant designs and materials. Better surgical guides and a short femoral stem allow for more accurate placement of the implants. A metal-on-metal articulation creates a larger diameter bearing and avoids polyethylene wear debris. Also paramount in the recent successes of surface replacement are refinements in surgical techniques, leading to more accurate component positioning, avoidance of neck notching, and an appreciation of the femoral head blood supply. It has been well-established that surgeons with higher volumes of hip resurfacing operations have a lower complication rate. The mid-term results of these newer hip resurfacing devices, coupled with appropriate patient selection and good surgical technique, have been encouraging. Although, more recently, surface replacement has come under fire because of the metal-on-metal articulation, the Australian National Joint Registry finds that a certain group of patients has greater survivorship with resurfacing than with total hip replacement. Additionally, the benefits of surface replacement include the preservation of bone, a lower dislocation rate, and potentially a higher activity level. Therefore, the presenter feels that surface replacement arthroplasty is still a viable option, for the right patient and surgeon

Tapered fluted grit-blasted modular stems have now become established as a successful method of femoral revision. The success of these stems is predicated on obtaining axial stability by milling the femur to a cone and then inserting the tapered prosthesis into that cone. Torsional stability is gained by flutes that cut into the diaphysis. By having modular proximal segments of different lengths, the leg length, offset, and anteversion can be adjusted after the distal stem is fixed. This maximises the chance for the stem to be driven into the canal to whatever level provides maximum stem stability. Modular fluted tapered stems have the potential benefits of being made of titanium and hence being both bone friendly and also having a modulus of elasticity closer to that of bone. They have a well-established high rate of fixation. Drawbacks include the risk of fracture of modular junctions and tapers, and difficulty of extraction. The indications for the use of these implants vary among surgeons, but the implants are suitable for use in a wide variety of bone loss categories. Non-modular fluted tapered stems also can gain excellent fixation, but are less versatile and in most practices are used for selected simpler revisions. Results from a number of institutions in North America and Europe demonstrate high rates of implant fixation. In a recently published paper from Mayo Clinic, the 10-year survivorship, free of femoral aseptic loosening revision, of a modular fluted tapered stem was 98% and the stem performed well across a wide range of bone deficiencies. The technique of implantation will be described in a video during the presentation

Spezializing in subfields of Orthopaedics is common in anglo-american countries for more than 20 years. IThe aim of this paper is to demonstrate the necessity of fellowship programms in extremity orientated subfileds of orthopaedics. Analyzing the results of ankle arthrodesis performed by general orthopaedic surgeons campared to ankle arthrodesis performed by spezialized foot and ankle surgeons the difference in results will be demonstrated. Patients and methods. In 40 patients an ankle arthrodesis was performed between 1998 and 2012. Group A was formed by 20 consecutive patients treated by spezial trained Foot and Ankle surgeons and group B was formed by 20 patients treted by general orthopaedic surgeons. The average age in group A at the time of surgery was 59,9y (34 to79y) compared to 63,4y (41 to 80y) in group B. The average follow up was 34 months respectively 32 months after surgery. The study included a spezial questionnaire with the AOFAS score and rating of patients dissatisfaction. The successful healing of the arthrodesis was determied by using standardized radiographs, Furthermore a pedobarography, and a videoanalyzis of the walking was incuded. Results. All procedures in group A were performed using an anterior approach. Neither pseudarthroses, equinus or other malositions were detected in this group. In group B wurdenin 16 patients an anterior and in 4 patients a lateral approach was used. Complications included 3 pseudarthroses, 4 equinus malpositions, 4 varus malpositions, 4 valgus malpositions and 8 penetrations of the subtalar joint. The AOFAS score on average was 78 (46–92) points in group A and 75 (34 – 94) in group B. Conclusion. The analyzis of the data revealed that the results in Group A were comparable to the results published in the literature. Results in group B were inferior to those in group A and to the results published in the literature of Foot and Ankle surgery. Foot and Ankle surgery became more demanding over the last decades. As already shown in anglo-american countries spezializing in certain fields of orthopaedics is a necessity. More complex hindfoot surgery should be performed in special centers with an adequate case load

The International Commission on Radiological Protection has established standards for radiation protection. This study aims to determine actual and perceived radiation dose and audit safe practice when using image-intensifiers in theatre. Between September 2012 and March 2013, 50 surgeons were surveyed during 39 procedures. Information collected by radiographers included the number of images the surgeons thought they used, actual number used, dose, screening time, number of people scrubbed, wearing thyroid collars and standing within 1m of the image-intensifier when in use. The primary surgeon was more likely to estimate the number of images used correctly compared to the assistant. Supervising consultants were most accurate, followed by registrars as primary surgeons, consultants as primary surgeons then assisting registrars, and lastly SHOs. Most surgeons underestimated the number of images used. 87.5% of scrubbed staff were standing within 1m of the image-intensifier during screening and 36.5% were wearing thyroid protection. Three surgeons stated they were not wearing collars as they were unavailable. We conclude that surgeons have a reasonable estimation of the x-rays used but are not undertaking simple steps to protect themselves from radiation. We plan to initiate an education program within the department and have ordered new, lightweight thyroid collars