JIA is one of the most common rheumatologic conditions of childhood. Establishing the diagnosis can be challenging in very young children, particularly when clinical presentation is atypical and serology is negative. Surgical intervention may be warranted in the appropriately selected patient with JIA.
Various assessment tools are often used to predict perioperative morbidity among patients older than 75 years who undergo total joint arthroplasty. Yet, few studies describe the use of phenotypic frailty as a predictor for outcomes. The goal of this study was to assess phenotypic frailty with the Sinai Abbreviated Geriatric Evaluation (SAGE) and compare its utility with established assessment tools used in practice. We specifically asked: (1) Can SAGE predict 30-day outcomes, including postoperative delirium? (2) Can SAGE determine the risk of prolonged hospital length of stay? (3) Is SAGE predictive for 30-day readmissions? (4) Can SAGE determine the risk of discharge to a specialized facility? Patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty were evaluated with the American Association of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), 5-point Modified Frailty Score (5-FS), and SAGE. Assessment scores were determined for each patient, and every incremental change in score was used to predict the likelihood of perioperative complications. A receiver operating characteristic analysis was also performed to calculate testing sensitivity for each assessment tool. The SAGE scores were more likely to predict 30-day complications (odds ratio [95 CI], 2.21 [1.32–3.70]), postoperative delirium (6.40 [1.78–23.03]), and length of stay greater than 2 days (3.90 [1.00–15.7]) compared with ASA, CCI, and 5-FS values. The SAGE scores were not predictive of readmission (1.77 [0.66–4.72]) or discharge to a specialized facility (1.48 [0.80–2.75]). The SAGE score was a more sensitive predictor (area under the curve, 0.700) for perioperative morbidity compared with ASA (0.638), CCI (0.662), and 5-FS (0.644) values. Therefore, SAGE scores can reliably assess risk of perioperative morbidity and may have better clinical utility than ASA, CCI, and 5-FS values for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. [
Orthopedics
. 2022;45(6):e315–e320.]
Intra-articular injections prior to total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been associated with postoperative infections. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a temporal relationship exists between hip injections prior to THA and infection. Specifically, we asked (1) Do patients who receive hip injections within 3 months of THA have a higher incidence of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) or surgical site infections (SSIs)? and (2) Do these patients incur higher 90-day costs? Patients with hip injections prior to THA were identified using a national database from 2010 to 2019. Three laterality-specific groups (injection 0 to 3 months, 3 to 6 months, and 6 to 12 months prior to THA)were compared with a matched cohort without prior injection (n=277,841). Primary outcomes included PJIs, SSIs, and costs. Patients who had injections within 3 months of THA had a higher incidence of PJIs at 90 days (5.1% vs 1.6%,
P
<.01) and 1 year (6.8% vs 2.1%,
P
<.01), when compared with the matched cohort. They also had a higher incidence of SSIs at 90 days (2.8% vs 1.2%,
P
<.01) and 1 year (3.7% vs 1.7%,
P
<.01). Mean costs were 13.7% higher in this injection cohort. Patients who had injections between 3 and 6 months prior to THA had higher incidence and odds of postoperative PJIs at 90 days (2.6% vs 1.6%,
P
<.04), whereas those with injections beyond 6 months had no differences in PJIs (
P
≥.46). Patients who receive hip injections within 3 months of undergoing primary THA are at increased risk for postoperative PJIs, SSIs, and higher costs. This study reaffirms guidelines for when to perform THAs in these populations. [
Orthopedics
. 2023;46(1):19–26.]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.