Introduction

Cardiac events have been found to occur with increased frequency in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients >65 y/o without known coronary artery disease (CAD). Avoidance of readmissions for cardiac events is paramount with bundled payment programs. It has been thought that many of these patients may have undiagnosed CAD because of sedentary life styles brought on by chronic osteoarthritis.

The purpose of this study is to assess with Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography (CCTA) the prevalence and severity of CAD in patients >65 y/o for elective TJA.

Background

In surgeon controlled bundled payment and service models, the goal is to reduce cost but preserve quality. The surgeon not only takes on risk for the surgery, but all costs during 90 days after the procedure. If savings are achieved over a previous target price, the surgeon can receive a monetary bonus. The surgeon is placed in a position to optimize the patients preoperatively to minimize expensive postoperative readmissions in a high risk population. Traditionally, surgeons request that primary care providers medically clear the patient for surgery with cardiology consultation at their discretion, and without dictating specific testing. Our participation in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program for total hip and knee replacement surgeries since 1/1/15 has demonstrated a significant number of patients having costly readmissions for cardiac events.

Background

Use of a robotic tool to perform surgery introduces a risk of unexpected soft tissue damage due to the uncommon tactile feedback for the surgeon. Early experience with robotics in total hip and knee replacement surgery reported having to abort the procedure in 18–34 percent of cases due to inability to complete preoperative planning, hardware and soft tissue issues, registration issues, as well as concerns over actual and potential soft tissue damage. These can result in significant morbidity to the patient, negating all the desired advantages of precision and reproducibility with robotic assisted surgery. The risk of soft tissue damage can be mitigated by haptic software prohibiting the cutting tip from striking vital soft tissues and by the surgeon making sure there is a clear workspace path for the cutting tool. This robotic total knee system with a semi-active haptic guided technique was approved by the FDA on 8/5/2015 and commercialized in August of 2016. Two year clinical results have not been reported to date.

Background

Intraoperative balancing of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be accomplished by either more prevalent but less predictable soft tissue releases, implant realignment through adjustments of bone resection or a combination of both. Robotic TKA allows for quantifiable precision performing bone resections for implant realignment within acceptable final component and limb alignments.

Introduction

Robotic TKA allows for quantifiable precision performing bone resections for implant realignment within acceptable final component and limb alignments. One of the early steps in this robotic technique is after initial exposure and removal of medial and lateral osteophytes, a “pose-capture” is performed with varus and valgus stress applied to the knee in near full extension and 90° of flexion to assess gaps. Component alignment adjustments can be made on the preoperative plan to balance the gaps. At this point in the procedure any posterior osteophytes will still be present, which could after removal change the flexion and extension gaps by 1–3mm. This must be taken into consideration, or changes in component alignment could result in over-correction of gaps can occur.

Introduction

In total knee arthroplasty (TKA), component realignment with bone-based surgical correction (BBSC) can provide soft tissue balance and avoid the unpredictability of soft tissue releases (STR) and potential for more post-operative pain. Robotic-assisted TKA enhances the ability to accurately control bone resection and implant position. The purpose of this study was to identify preoperative and intraoperative predictors for soft tissue release where maximum use of component realignment was desired.

Fifteen-year survivorships studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Total knee imbalance with either too tight or loose soft tissues account for up to 54% of revisions in one series. This may account for many of the 20% unsatisfactory total knee arthroplasty outcomes.

Soft tissue balancing technique is more like an art. The surgeon relies on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly.

New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intraoperative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensor tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, imbalance situations such as a too tight MCL or ITB, an incompetent or too tight PCL, or malrotated femoral or tibial component can be identified. A decision can be made as to whether to recut the bone to realign components, do a soft tissue release, or a combination of both. Soft tissue releases can be titrated while observing equalizing compartment pressures.

Sensor feedback improves soft tissue balancing. More balanced compartments occur using a sensor trial than with standard soft tissue balancing technique blinded to sensor information. A multicenter three year study has shown that having the medial and lateral compartments in flexion and extension balanced within 15 pounds provides better outcomes. Patients with quantitatively balanced TKA with <15lbf mediolateral load differential have better forgotten knee scores at six weeks and six months. Use of smart trials is a new approach to total knee replacement surgery allowing fine tune balancing and takes soft tissue balancing from art to science.

Anterior surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have increased popularity due to expected faster recovery and less pain. However, the direct anterior approach (Heuter approach which has been popularised by Matta) has been associated with a higher rate of early revisions than other approaches due to femoral component loosening and fractures. It is also noted to have a long learning curve and other unique complications like anterior femoral cutaneous and femoral nerve injuries. Most surgeons performing this approach will require the use of an expensive special operating table. An alternative to the direct anterior approach is the anterior-based muscle-sparing approach. It is also known as the modified Watson-Jones approach, anterolateral muscle-sparing approach, minimally invasive anterolateral approach and the Röttinger approach. With this technique, the hip joint is approached through the muscle interval between the tensor fascia lata and the gluteal muscles, as opposed to the direct anterior approach which is between the sartorius and rectus femoris and the tensor fascia lata. This approach places the femoral nerve at less risk for injury. I perform this technique in the lateral decubitus position, but it can also be performed in the supine position. An inexpensive home-made laminated L-shaped board is clamped on end of table allowing the ipsilateral leg to extend, adduct, and externally rotate during the femoral preparation.

This approach for THA has been reported to produce excellent results. One study reports a complication rate of 0.6% femoral fracture rate and 0.4% revision rate for femoral stem loosening. In a prospective randomised trial looking at the learning curve with new approach, the anterior-based muscle-sparing anterior approach had lower complications than a direct anterior approach. The complications and mean operative time with this approach are reported to be no different than a direct lateral approach. Since this surgical approach is not through an internervous interval, a concern is that this may result in a permanent functional defect as result of injury to the superior gluteal nerve. At a median follow-up of 9.3 months, a MRI study showed 42% of patients with this approach had fat replacement of the tensor fascia lata, which is thought to be irreversible. The clinical significance remains unclear, and inconsequential in my experience. A comparison MRI study showed that there was more damage and atrophy to the gluteus medius muscle with a direct lateral approach at 3 and 12 months. My anecdotal experience is that there is faster recovery and less early pain with this approach.

A study of the first 57 patients I performed showed significantly less pain and faster recovery in the first six weeks in patients performed with the anterior-based muscle-sparing approach when compared to a matched cohort of THA patients performed with a direct lateral approach. From 2004 to 2017, I have performed 1308 total hip replacements with the anterior-based muscle sparing approach. Alternatively, I will use the direct lateral approach for patients with stiff hips with significant flexion and/or external rotation contractures where I anticipate difficulty with femoral exposure, osteoporotic femurs due to increased risk of intraoperative trochanteric fractures, previously operated hips with scarring or retained hardware, and Crowe III-IV dysplastic hips when there may be a need for a femoral shortening or derotational osteotomy. Complications have been very infrequent. This approach is a viable alternative to the direct anterior approach for patients desiring a fast recovery. The anterior-based muscle-sparing approach is the approach that I currently use for all outpatient total hip surgeries.

Total knee replacements are being more commonly performed in active younger and obese patients. Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that cemented total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. Cemented knee arthroplasties are doomed to failure due to loss of cement-bone interlock over time. Inferior survivorship occurs in younger patients and obese patients who would be expected to place increased stress on the bone-cement interfaces. Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) studies have indicated that cementless fixation should perform better than cemented fixation. However, cementless fixation for total knee replacement has not gained widespread utilization due to the plethora of poor results reported in early series. The poor initial results with cementless total knee replacement have occurred due to poor implant designs such as cobalt chrome porous interfaces, poor initial tibial component stability, lack of continuous porous coating, poor polyethylene, and use of metal-backed patellae.

I have used cementless fixation for total knee replacements for young, active, and heavy patients since 1986 when durability over 20 years is desirable. My series of over 1,300 cementless TKAs represents about 20% of the 6,500 total knees I have performed from 1986 to 2017. I have seen initial failures in my series due to the use of metal-backed patellae with thin polyethylene, older generation polyethylene, and use of screws with the tibial components which provide access to the metaphyseal bone for polyethylene wear debris. Overall implant fixation failures were still significantly low due to the use of a highly porous titanium surface on both the tibial and femoral components. With the advent of utilizing implants with continuous porous surfaces and highly crosslinked polyethylene, and elimination of use of metal-backed patellae and tibial screws, I have only had one revision due to aseptic loosening or osteolysis in the last 1,071 cases performed since 2002.

Almost 50% of total knees are now performed on patients under the age of 65. A 55-year-old patient has a 30 year life expectancy. Modern total knee replacement design has made biological fixation predictable for young and heavy patients. Because it is a biological interface, it should respond better than cement to the increased stresses that will be applied over many years by our younger, more active and heavier total knee population.

Stems provide short- and long-term stability to the femoral and tibial components. Poorer epiphyseal and metaphyseal bone quality will require sharing or offloading the femoral and tibial component interfaces with a stem. One needs to use stem technique most appropriate for each individual case because of variable anatomy and bone loss situations. The conflict with trying to obtain stability via the stem is that most stems are cylindrical but femoral and tibial metaphyseal/diaphyseal areas are conical in shape. Viable stem options include fully cemented short and long stems, uncemented long stems, offset uncemented stems, and a hybrid application of a cemented proximal end of longer uncemented diaphyseal engaging stems.

Stems are not without their risk. The more the load is transferred to the cortex, the greater the risk of proximal interface stress shielding. A long uncemented stem has similar stress shielding as a short cemented stem. Long diaphyseal engaging stems that are cemented or uncemented have the potential to have end of stem pain, especially if more diaphyseal reaming is done to obtain greater cortical contact. A conical shaped long stem can provide more stability than a long cylindrical stem and avoid diaphyseal reaming. Use of long stems may create difficulty in placement of the tibial and femoral components in an optimal position. If the femoral or tibial components do not allow an offset stem insertion, using a long offset stem or short cemented stem is preferred. The amount of metaphyseal bone loss will drive the choice of stem used. Short cemented stems will not have good stability in poor metaphyseal bone without getting the cement out to the cortex. Long cemented stems provide satisfactory survivorship, however, most surgeons avoid cementing long stems due to the difficulty of removal, if a subsequent revision is required. If the metaphyseal bone is excellent, use of a short cemented stem or long uncemented stem can be expected to have good results. Long fully uncemented stems must have independent stability to be effective, or should be proximally cemented as a hybrid technique. Cases with AOI type IIb and III tibial and femoral defects are best managed with use of metaphyseal cones with short cemented stems or long hybrid straight or offset stems. Some studies also suggest that if the cone is very stable, no stem may be required.

My preference is to use a short cemented stem or hybrid conical stem in patients with good metaphyseal bone. If significant metaphyseal bone loss is present, I will use a porous cone with either a short cemented stem, hybrid cylindrical or offset stem depending on the primary stability of the cone and whether the femoral or tibial component can be placed in an optimal position in patients with good metaphyseal bone.

Background

The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) was developed by the US Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) to evaluate a payment and service delivery model to reduce cost but preserve quality. 90 day postoperative expenditures are reconciled against a target price, allowing for a monetary bonus to the provider if savings were achieved. The surgeon is placed in a position to optimize the patients preoperatively to minimize expensive postoperative cardiovascular readmissions in a high risk population. Traditionally, surgeons request that primary care providers medically clear the patient for surgery with or without additional cardiology consultation, without dictating specific testing. Typical screening includes an EKG, occasionally an echocardiogram and nuclear stress test, and rarely a cardiac catheterization. Our participation in the BPCI program for total hip and knee replacement surgeries since 1/1/15 has demonstrated a significant number of patients having readmissions for cardiac events.

Background

Intraoperative balancing can be accomplished by either more prevalent but less predictable soft tissue releases, implant realignment through adjustments of bone resection or a combination of both. There is no published study directly comparing these methods.

Background

Use of a robotic tool to perform surgery introduces a risk of unexpected soft tissue damage due to the lack of tactile feedback for the surgeon. Early experience with robotics in total hip and knee replacement surgery reported having to abort the procedure in 18–34 percent of cases due to inability to complete preoperative planning, hardware and soft tissue issues, registration issues, as well as concerns over actual and potential soft tissue damage. These damages to the soft tissues resulted in significant morbidity to the patient, negating all the desired advantages of precision and reproducibility with robotic assisted surgery. The risk of soft tissue damage can be mitigated by haptic software prohibiting the cutting tip from striking vital soft tissues and by the surgeon making sure there is a clear workspace path for the cutting tool. This robotic total knee system with a semi-active haptic guided technique was approved by the FDA on 8/5/2015 and commercialized in August of 2016. One year clinical results have not been reported to date.

Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al. reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al. reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores do so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery.

Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intra-operatively and post-operatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly.

New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensor tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide if compartment loading differences are greater than 15 pounds whether to perform a soft tissue balance or minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is chosen, pressure data can indicate where to perform the release and allow the surgeon to assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed.

A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes out to three years.

Pre-operative planning in revision total knee replacement is important to simplify the surgery for the implant representative, operating room personnel and the surgeon.

Revision knee arthroplasty is performed for many different reasons and of variable complexity. Many implant options can be considered including cemented and cementless primary and stemmed revision tibial and femoral components, with posterior cruciate retention or resection, and either with no constraint, varus/valgus constraint, or with rotating hinge bearings. One may also need femoral and tibial spacers, metaphyseal augments, or bulk allograft. It is important to pre-operatively determine which of these implants you may need. If you schedule a revision total knee and ask the implant representative to “bring everything you've got, just in case,” they will have to bring a truck full of instruments and implants.

The first step of pre-operative planning is to determine how much implant constraint will be needed. Survivorship of revision total knees with modern varus/valgus constrained or rotating hinge implants are not that unacceptable. Ideally to enhance longevity, the least constraint needed should be used. This requires determination of the status of the ligaments. Varus and valgus stress is applied to the knee in near full extension, mid-flexion, and ninety degrees of flexion. If instability of the knee is noted, then radiographs are reviewed to determine if component malposition or malalignment is the reason for the collateral ligament laxity. If radiographs don't show a reason, then have additional constraint available in case the knee can't be balanced with proper component position and ligament balancing. In cases other than simple revisions, the posterior cruciate ligament is usually inadequate or needs to be resected to balance the knee. Substitution for the posterior cruciate ligament is usually needed for most revisions

The second step of pre-operative planning is to review radiographs to determine the amount and location of any bone loss. Osteolysis induced bone loss is usually worse than seen on plain radiographs. If unsure, a CT scan can be of help. The presence of significant bone loss contraindicates the use of primary components and mandates the need for stemmed implants. Larger defects may warrant having metallic augments or bulk graft present. Most revision knee implants can be conservatively metaphyseal cemented with diaphyseal engaging press-fit stems.

The third step of pre-operative planning is to be familiar with what implants are present. Occasionally, one may not need to revise components that are stable and well aligned. Having compatible components available may simplify the surgery

Excellent pre-operative planning will minimise the need to bring in an excessive number of instruments and implants. It will help assure that the patient has a stable revision knee and simplify the surgery for all participants

Introduction & Aims

The traditional method of soft-tissue balancing during TKA is subjective in nature, and stiffness and instability are common indications for revision, suggesting that TKA balancing by subjective assessment is suboptimal. This study examines the intraoperative mediolateral loads measured with a nanosensor-enabled tibial insert trial and the sequential balancing steps used to achieve quantitative balance. Data obtained from a prospective multicenter study was assessed to determine the effect of targeted ligament release on intra-articular loading, and to understand which types of releases are necessary to achieve quantified ligament balance.

Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85% to 97%. However, excellent survivorship does not equate to excellent patient reported outcomes. Noble et al. reported that 14% of their patients were dissatisfied with their outcome with more than half expressing problems with routine activities of daily living. There is also a difference in the patient's subjective assessment of outcome and the surgeon's objective assessment. Dickstein et al. reported that a third of total knee patients were dissatisfied, even though the surgeons felt that their results were excellent. Most of the patients who report lower outcome scores due so because their expectations are not being fulfilled by the total knee replacement surgery.

Perhaps this dissatisfaction is a result of subtle soft tissue imbalance that we have difficulty in assessing intra-operatively and post-operatively. Soft tissue balancing techniques still rely on subjective feel for appropriate ligamentous tension by the surgeon. Surgical experience and case volume play a major role in each surgeon's relative skill in balancing the knee properly.

New technology of “smart trials” with embedded microelectronics and accelerometers, used in the knee with the medial retinaculum closed, can provide dynamic, intra-operative feedback regarding knee quantitative compartment pressures and component tracking. After all bone cuts are made using the surgeon's preferred techniques, trial components with the sensored tibial trial are inserted and the knee is taken through a passive range of motion. After visualizing the resultant compartment pressures and tracking data on a graphical interface, the surgeon can decide whether to perform a soft tissue balance or minor bone recuts. If soft tissue balancing is chosen, pressure data can indicate where to perform the release and allow the surgeon to assess the pressure changes as titrated soft tissue releases are performed.

A multi-center study using smart trials has demonstrated dramatically better outcomes out to three years.

Robotic arm-assisted total knee replacement is performed as a semi-active system in which haptic guidance is used to precisely position and align components. This is based on pre-operative planning based on CT imaging and can be modified as needed throughout the procedure. This technology, as shown with unicompartmental arthroplasty, is more accurate than conventional and even computer navigated instrumentation and will decrease variability. The knee can be planned to a neutral mechanical alignment. Intra-operatively, the computer will demonstrate compartment gap measurements to assist with soft tissue balancing.

Alternatively, limb and component alignment can be accurately adjusted several degrees off the neutral axis to balance the knee and avoid or minimise soft tissue releases. This allows a more constitutional alignment within the alignment parameters accepted by the surgeon. This technique was utilised commonly in the first 60 robotic total knee replacements performed.

We will now have the ability to collect accurate component positioning, alignment, and soft tissue balance data that can be correlated to outcomes of total knee replacements.

Removing well-fixed components can be difficult. It can be required in instances of infection, malalignment, instability and polyethylene wear. Success requires patience, skill and the use of correct instruments. Using too much force or haste will result is excessive bone loss and a more difficult reconstruction. One's goal should be to save bone and save time. The surgeon must be familiar with the implants to know if any special techniques will be required to deal with modularity of the tibial polyethylene, surface coatings and geometry of pegs and stems. The usual steps are to remove the tibial liner if modular, followed by removal of the femoral component, then tibial component. Thin osteotomes are used to loosen the cement prosthesis or bone prosthesis interfaces to be able to remove the implants and not lose bone in the process. Removal of cement mantles around long-stemmed femoral and tibial components can be facilitated by femoral cortical window osteotomies and tibial crest osteotomies.

Acetabular protrusio occurs from migration of the femoral head medial to Kohler's line. This occurs in inflammatory arthritis, osteoarthritis with coxa vara deformities, previous acetabular fracture, and in metabolic bone diseases such as osteomalacia, Paget's disease, Marfan's syndrome, and osteogenesis imperfecta. Total hip replacement in this situation is difficult due to the requirement to place the acetabular component opening at the level of the normal rim or the patient will be at risk for component-on-component or bone-on-bone impingement, resulting in dislocation or component loosening. The deficient medial wall doesn't resist cup subsidence and the deficient peripheral rim may provide poor initial cup stability.

Many management options have been described including using cement, bulk bone graft, and particulate graft to support the cup medially, and use of a reinforcement ring cage to provide better rim support. Gates reported on a series of 36 primary total hip replacements with acetabular protrusio treated with cemented cups and medial particulate autograft with a mean follow-up of 12.8 years with 6 definitively loose, 3 probably loose, and 22 possibly loose. The technique that provides initial porous cup stability and potential for long-term biological fixation is preferred. Mullaji and Shetty reported 90% good and excellent results and no loosening or migration at a mean 4.2 years in 30 primary total hips with acetabular protrusio treated with oversized porous cups for rim support and medial particulate bone grafting. Forty percent of their cases had protrusio greater than 15 mm medial to Kohler's line. Hansen and Ries also reported no revisions using this same technique in 19 revision total hips with an average follow-up of 2.8 years. However, they emphasised that this technique should only be used if the peripheral rim is intact, and if inadequate, to use a reconstruction cage. In revision total hips with large medial acetabular defects this is more likely to be the case. However, use of a reconstruction cage doesn't provide biological fixation. Ilyas reported a 15.1% loosening rate using cages for revisions with medial defects at a follow-up of 6 years.

I have alternatively used a porous protrusio shell when rim support is poor and the medial defect is greater than 10 mm. The technique is to perform a cylindrical peripheral ream and a medial hemispherical ream. This provides greater host bone to shell contact for stability and greater biological fixation, and fills much of the medial defect. I used this technique in 43 cases with an average follow-up of 3.7 years. There were no revisions, no apparent cup migrations, and no progressive component bone radiolucencies. For primary total hips with protrusio, when good rim support can be achieved with a few millimeters of peripheral over-ream, a standard porous cup and medial particulate autografting is preferred. However, in many primary cases with greater than 10 mm of protrusio, the peripheral rim may be significantly stress shielded and thus, may have poor rim support unless the rim is significantly over-reamed. Because of my excellent results using protrusio shells in revision cases, I will consider also using a protrusio shell in primary total hips in elderly patients with >10 mm of protrusio. I have experience in 10 primary cases with an average follow-up of 4.1 years. One failed for infection. The other 9 have been successful with no apparent cup migration and no progressive component bone radiolucencies.