Porous metaphyseal cones are increasingly used for fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). Both cemented shorter length stems and longer diaphyseal engaging stems are currently utilized with metaphyseal cones with no clear evidence of superiority. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our experience with 3D printed titanium metaphyseal cones with both short cemented and longer cementless stems from a clinical and radiographic perspective. In total 136 3D printed titanium metaphyseal cones were implanted. The mean patient age was 63 and 48% were female. The mean BMI was 33 and the mean ASA class was 2.5. There were 42 femoral cones in which 28 cemented and 14 cementless stems were utilized. There were 94 tibial cones in which 67 cemented and 27 cementless stems were utilized. The choice for stem fixation was surgeon dependent and in general cones were utilized for AORI type 2 and 3 bone defects on the femur and tibia. The most common fixation scenario was short cemented stems on both the femur and tibia followed by cemented stem fixation on the tibia and cementless fixation on the femur. Clinical data such as revision, complication, and PRO was collected at last follow-up (minimum follow-up 1 year). Radiographic analysis included cone bony ingrowth and coronal and sagittal alignment on long-standing radiographs. Descriptive statistics were used to compare demographics between patients who had malalignment (HKA beyond +/− 3 degrees and flexion/extension beyond +/− 3 degrees). Adjusted logistic regression models were run to assess malalignment risk by stem type.Introduction
Methods
The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative has identified pathways for improving the value of care. However, patient-specific modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors may increase costs beyond the target payment. We sought to identify risk factors for exceeding our institution’s target payment, the so-called ‘bundle busters’. Using our data warehouse and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data we identified all 412 patients who underwent total joint arthroplasty and qualified for our institution’s BPCI model, between July 2015 and May 2017. Episodes where CMS payments exceeded the target payment were considered ‘busters’ (n = 123). Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using a modified Poisson regression analysis.Aims
Patients and Methods
For this retrospective cohort study, patients aged ≤ 30 years
(very young) who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) were compared
with patients aged ≥ 60 years (elderly) to evaluate the rate of
revision arthroplasty, implant survival, the indications for revision,
the complications, and the patient-reported outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary
THA between January 2000 and May 2015 from our institutional database.
A total of 145 very young and 1359 elderly patients were reviewed.
The mean follow-up was 5.3 years (1 to 18). Logistic generalized
estimating equations were used to compare characteristics and the revision
rate. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan–Meier curves and hazard
rates were created using Cox regression.Aims
Patients and Methods
