Patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility are at increased risk for hip instability. Measuring the change in sacral slope (ΔSS) with standing and seated lateral radiographs is commonly used to determine spinopelvic mobility pre-operatively. Sacral slope should decrease at least 10 degrees to demonstrate adequate accommodation. Accommodation of <10 deg necessitates acetabular component position change or use of a dual mobility implant. There is potential for different ΔSS measurements in the same patient based on sitting posture. 78 patients who underwent THA were reviewed to quantify the variability in pre-operative spinopelvic mobility when two different seated positions (relaxed sitting v. pre-rise sitting) were used in the same patient.Introduction
Methods
Tibial component loosening is a frequent cause of failure in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Management options include isolated tibial component revision or full component revision. A full component revision is frequently selected by surgeons who are unfamiliar with the existing implant or have a “let's just start over attitude.” This option adds morbidity versus isolated tibial exchange. While isolated tibial exchange has lower morbidity, it is technically more challenging with regard to exposure and maintaining prosthetic stability. This study was designed to compare these two reconstructive options. Patients revised for isolated aseptic tibial loosening were identified from 2012–2017. Patients with revision implants, or those revised for infection, instability, osteolysis, or femoral component loosening were excluded. 161 patients met these criteria, 85 patients had an isolated tibial revision and 76 had revision of both components despite having only a loose tibial component. Patient demographics as well as clinical and radiographic outcomes were recorded for each cohort.Introduction
Methods
Studies are being done comparing 1-stage vs. 2-stage protocols for PJI. 1-stage protocols take an extended period of time requiring 2 separate preps and sets of instruments in order to ensure optimal sterility. While intraoperative service time is one part of the reimbursement algorithm, reimbursement has lagged behind for single stage treatment. If 1-stage results are acceptable, but not reimbursed appropriately, surgeons may be discouraged from managing PJI in a 1-stage fashion. We ask, “What is the reimbursement and intraoperative service time for 1-stage procedures compared to primary surgery?” Relative Value Unit's (RVU's), reimbursement and operative time for 50 PJI procedures were reviewed and compared to 250 primary (1°) THA and 250 primary (1°) TKA by four surgeons. Coding was done per AAOS guidelines.Introduction
Methods
