scholarly journals Preoperative Elevated International Normalized Ratio Cannot Increase Transfusion or Complication in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Study of 552 Cases

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linbo Peng ◽  
Junfeng Zeng ◽  
Yi Zeng ◽  
Yuangang Wu ◽  
Jing Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Loss Maximum ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract Background: Verify if the elevated preoperative International Normalized Ratio (INR) can increase transfusion and complication rate in primary total hip arthroplasty.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the database of adults who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty between 2014 to 2018 by the same surgeon. 552 cases were assigned into 3 groups by preoperative INR class: INR≤0.9, 0.9＜INR＜1.0, and INR≥1.0 eventually. We regarded the transfusion rate as the primary outcome. We also included perioperative blood loss, maximum Hb-drop, postoperative anemia needs medicine, length of stay (LOS), re-operation, the complication rate in 90 days and mortality as the secondary outcomes. Univariable analyses were utilized to compare baselines and outcomes between groups. Binary Logistic Regression was used to adjust differences of baselines among groups.Results: All the cases had an INR＜1.5. Among all the cases, 93(16.8%) had INR≤0.9, 268 (48.6%) had 0.9＜INR＜1.0, and 191 (34.6%) had INR≥1.0, respectively. In the univariable analyses, with the INR elevated, The transfusion rates increased from 1.08% for INR≤0.9, 1.12% for 0.9＜INR＜1.0 to 5.76% for INR≥1.0 (p＜0.05). The overall complication rate increased from 10.8% for INR≤0.9, 16.4% for 0.9＜INR＜1.0 to 22.5% for INR≥1.0 (p＜0.05). When controlling for the demographics and comorbidities characteristics, there was no statistically significant difference when evaluating the odds of transfusion nor overall complication rate between the groups (p＞0.05).Conclusions: The transfusion and complication rate cannot increase along with the INR elevated in primary THA. With the improvement of arthroplasty protocol and use of tranexamic acid, the INR＜1.5 was still a conventional safe threshold.

scholarly journals Clinical, Functional and Radiographic Outcomes of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty between Direct Anterior Approach and Posterior Approach: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linbo Peng ◽  
Yi Zeng ◽  
Yuangang Wu ◽  
Junfeng Zeng ◽  
Yuan Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Direct Anterior Approach ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Radiographic Outcomes ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract Background: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes of primary total hip arthroplasty between the direct anterior approach and posterior approach. Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE databases and Cochrane library from the inception dates to November 1, 2019. And we also searched for the meta-analysis which was published in the past for randomized controlled trials. Results: A total of 7 randomized controlled trials with 600 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among these, 301 and 299 patients were in the DAA and PA groups, respectively. DAA was associated with a longer surgery time by a mean of 13.74 min (95% CI 6.88 to 20.61, p < 0.0001, I2=93%). Postoperative early functional outcomes were significantly better in the DAA group than PA group such as Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) postoperative 1 day (MD=-0.65, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.38,p < 0.00001, I2=0%), VAS score postoperative 2 days (MD=-0.67, 95% CI -1.34 to -0.01, p =0.05,I2=88%) and Harris Hip Score (HHS) postoperative 6 weeks(MD=6.05, 95% CI 1.14 to 10.95, p =0.02, I2=52%).There was no significant difference between the DAA and PA groups at length of incision, length of stay(LOS), blood loss, transfusion rates or complication rates. We found no significant difference between the two groups about late functional outcomes such as VAS score postoperative 12 months or HHS scores postoperative 3, 6, 12 months. A significant difference in Radiographic outcomes can not be detected too. Conclusions: DAA needs longer surgery time than PA in primary total hip arthroplasty. The DAA offers better early functional recovery than PA. There is no significant difference between the two groups in terms of other clinical, complication, late functional and radiographic outcomes. The evidence about the superiority of DAA is insufficient, which needs more research.

scholarly journals Conversion from a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation to a cemented or uncemented total hip arthroplasty device: a retrospective review of 198 hips with previous intertrochanteric femur fractures

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Xiulan Han ◽  
Wenli Chen ◽  
Shuai Mao ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Proximal Femoral Nail ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Elderly Individuals ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Femoral Nail ◽  
Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background At present, it is unclear which device (uncemented or cemented total hip arthroplasty [UTA or CTA, respectively]) is more suitable for the conversion of a failed proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA). The aim of this review was to assess the outcomes of failed PFNAs converted to a UTA or CTA device in elderly individuals with intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFFs). Methods Two hundred fifty-eight elderly individuals (258 hips) with IFFs who underwent a conversion to a UTA or CTA device following failed PFNAs during 2007–2017 were retrospectively identified from the China Southern Medical Centre (CSMC) database. The primary endpoint was the Harris Hip Score (HHS); secondary endpoint was the key orthopaedic complication rate. Results The median follow-up was 65 months (60–69 months). Significant distinctions were observed (87.26 ± 16.62 for UTA vs. 89.32 ± 16.08 for CTA, p = 0.021; 86.61 ± 12.24 for symptomatic UTA vs. 88.68 ± 13.30 for symptomatic CTA, p = 0.026). A significant difference in the overall key orthopaedic complication rate was detected (40.8% [40/98] vs. 19.0% [19/100], p = 0.001). Apparent distinctions were detected in terms of the rate of revision, loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (11.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.025; 13.2% for UTA vs 5.0% for CTA, p = 0.043; 10.2% for UTA vs 3.0% for CTA, p = 0.041, respectively). Conclusion For elderly individuals with IFFs who suffered a failed PFNA, CTA devices may have a noteworthy advantage in regard to the revision rate and the rate of key orthopaedic complications compared with UTA devices, and CTA revision should be performed as soon as possible, regardless of whether these individuals have symptoms.

Two Doses of Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Offers No Benefit over One Dose in Total Hip Arthroplasty

2019 ◽  
Vol 04 (01) ◽  
pp. 001-006
Author(s):  
Ryan S. Charette ◽  
Jenna A. Bernstein ◽  
Matthew Sloan ◽  
Corbyn M. Nchako ◽  
Atul F. Kamath ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Tranexamic Acid ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractTranexamic acid (TXA) has been shown to reduce blood loss and transfusions in total hip arthroplasty (THA). There is no consensus on the ideal number of doses that best reduces blood loss while limiting complications. Our study compared one versus two doses of intravenous TXA in primary THA and its effect on blood transfusion rate. We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing primary THA at our two high-volume arthroplasty centers from 2013 to 2016. Patients were included if they underwent unilateral primary THA, and received one or two doses of TXA. Patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation were excluded. Our primary outcome measure was postoperative transfusion rate. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, length of stay (LOS), rate of deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE), readmission, and reoperation. A total of 1,273 patients were included; 843 patients received one dose of TXA and 430 patients received two TXA doses. Univariate analysis demonstrated no significant difference in transfusion rate when administering one versus two doses. There was no significant difference in LOS, or rates of DVT/PE, readmission, and reoperation. When comparing patients receiving aspirin prophylaxis, there was a significantly decreased blood volume loss with two doses (1,360 vs. 1,266 mL, mean difference = 94 mL; p = 0.017). In patients, undergoing primary unilateral THA, there is no difference in postoperative transfusion rate with one or two doses of intravenous TXA. There was no difference in thromboembolic events. Given the added cost without clear benefit, these findings support one rather than two doses of TXA during primary THA.

Preoperative Optimisation of Anaemia for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 515-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dinesh P. Alexander ◽  
Nicholas Frew
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Autologous Blood ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
National Audit ◽  
Blood Management ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Preoperative Anaemia ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background The 2009 NHS Blood and Transplant national comparative audit on blood use following primary total hip arthroplasty (THR) highlighted that preoperative anaemia was common and undertreated. They recommended that hospitals have a written policy for treating anaemia preoperatively. In our centre, we found that preoperative optimisation of anaemia, significantly reduced blood transfusion rate to <5%. The 2015 national audit showed that even though 48% of patients received tranexamic acid, 85% of patients required transfusion. By conducting a systematic review of literature on blood management for preoperative anaemia in primary THR; we aimed to validate the recommendations of the national audit and increase its awareness in the orthopaedic community. Methods A PubMed Search was performed to identify suitable literature limited to randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, meta-analyses and systematic reviews involving primary THR. We excluded any THRs performed for trauma and revision arthroplasty. Our exclusion criteria for the intervention was the use of autologous methods such as cell salvage techniques and preoperative autologous blood donation. Results Analysis of 13 publications showed widespread study heterogeneity, which precluded meta-analysis. Preoperative blood management (PBM) interventions included the use of recombinant human erythropoietin and oral iron supplementation in 12/13 and 11/13 studies respectively. There were significant differences in transfusion rates between PBM and control groups in 12/13 studies. Conclusions The findings overwhelmingly support preoperative optimisation of anaemia. The main barrier to wider implementation remains the cost effectiveness. We recommend using our validated protocol, which has shown to significantly reduce transfusion rates, length of stay and remain cost effective.

No clinically meaningful difference in 1-year patient-reported outcomes among major approaches for primary total hip arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002199201
Author(s):  
◽  
James B Bircher ◽  
Atul F Kamath ◽  
Nicolas S Piuzzi ◽  
Wael K Barsoum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Consecutive Series ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background: Debate continues around the most effective surgical approach for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study’s purpose was to compare 1-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of patients who underwent direct anterior (DA), transgluteal anterolateral (AL)/direct lateral (DL), and posterolateral (PL) approaches. Methods: A prospective consecutive series of primary THA for osteoarthritis ( n = 2,390) were performed at 5 sites within a single institution with standardised care pathways (20 surgeons). Patients were categorised by approach: DA ( n = 913; 38%), AL/DL ( n = 505; 21%), or PL ( n = 972; 41%). Primary outcomes were pain, function, and activity assessed by 1-year postoperative PROMs. Multivariable regression modeling was used to control for differences among the groups. Wald tests were performed to test the significance of select patient factors and simultaneous 95% confidence intervals were constructed. Results: At 1-year postoperative, PROMs were successfully collected from 1842 (77.1%) patients. Approach was a statistically significant factor for 1-year HOOS pain ( p = 0.002). Approach was not a significant factor for 1-year HOOS-PS ( p = 0.16) or 1-year UCLA activity ( p = 0.382). Pairwise comparisons showed no significant difference in 1-year HOOS pain scores between DA and PL approach ( p  > 0.05). AL/DL approach had lower (worse) pain scores than DA or PL approaches with differences in adjusted median score of 3.47 and 2.43, respectively ( p  < 0.05). Conclusions: Patients receiving the AL/DL approach had a small statistical difference in pain scores at 1 year, but no clinically meaningful differences in pain, activity, or function exist at 1-year postoperative.

scholarly journals Clinical, Functional and Radiographic Outcomes of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty between Direct Anterior Approach and Posterior Approach: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linbo Peng ◽  
Yi Zeng ◽  
Yuangang Wu ◽  
Junfeng Zeng ◽  
Yuan Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Direct Anterior Approach ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Radiographic Outcomes ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract Background: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the direct anterior approach and posterior approach for primary total hip arthroplasty in terms of the clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes. Methods: We searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases and Cochrane Library from their inception to November 1, 2019. We searched for previously published articles and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Results: A total of 7 randomized controlled trials with 600 participants met the inclusion criteria. Among these patients, 301 and 299 were included in the DAA and PA groups, respectively. The DAA was associated with a longer surgery by a mean duration of 13.74 min (95% CI 6.88 to 20.61, p < 0.0001, I 2 =93%). The postoperative early functional outcomes were significantly better in the DAA group than in the PA group, such as the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score at 1 day postoperatively (MD=-0.65, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.38, p < 0.00001, I 2 =0%), VAS score at 2 days postoperatively (MD=-0.67, 95% CI -1.34 to -0.01, p =0.05, I 2 =88%) and Harris Hip Score (HHS) at 6 weeks postoperatively (MD=6.05, 95% CI 1.14 to 10.95, p =0.02, I 2 =52%). There was no significant difference between the DAA and PA groups in the length of the incision, hospital length of stay (LOS), blood loss, transfusion rates or complication rates. We found no significant difference between the two groups regarding late functional outcomes, such as the VAS score at 12 months postoperatively or the HHS scores at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. A significant difference in the radiographic outcomes was not detected. Conclusions: The DAA requires a longer surgery time than does the PA in primary total hip arthroplasty. The DAA yields better early functional recovery than does the PA. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of other clinical, complication-related, late functional or radiographic outcomes. The evidence on the superiority of the DAA is insufficient and needs to be studied further.

scholarly journals Intravenous versus Intra-Articular Tranexamic Acid in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomised Double Blinded Non-Inferiority Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afsana Hasan ◽  
David Campbell ◽  
Peter Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Tranexamic Acid ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Double Blinded ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Introduction Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been shown to be effective in reducing post-operative blood loss after hip replacement surgery. Clinicians can be reluctant to administer intravenous (IV) TXA to high risk patients and intra-articular (IA) administration has been proposed as an alternative mode of delivery. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of IV versus IA administration of TXA.   Methods This prospective, double blinded, randomised non-inferiority trial, compared 69 patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) who received either 3 doses of 15mg/kg of IV TXA or 3 g of IA TXA after capsular closure. The primary outcomes were change in Hb and the rate of blood transfusion. The secondary outcome was the rate of VTE.   Results The mean haemoglobin level change from pre-operative to day 1 post-operative for the IV group was 26.7g/L and for IA group was 27.3g/L. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups (p=0.82). No patients required a transfusion or developed a VTE.   Conclusions IA administration of TXA can be equally effective as IV in the reduction of blood loss and the prevention of post-operative anaemia in primary THA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document