Association of Technology Usage and Decreased Revision TKA Rates for Low-Volume Surgeons Using an Optimal Prosthesis Combination: An Analysis of 53,264 Primary TKAs.
Michael McAuliffe,Ibrahim Darwish,Jon Anderson,Alex Nicholls,Sophie Corfield,Dylan Harries,Christopher Vertullo
{"title":"Association of Technology Usage and Decreased Revision TKA Rates for Low-Volume Surgeons Using an Optimal Prosthesis Combination: An Analysis of 53,264 Primary TKAs.","authors":"Michael McAuliffe,Ibrahim Darwish,Jon Anderson,Alex Nicholls,Sophie Corfield,Dylan Harries,Christopher Vertullo","doi":"10.2106/jbjs.24.00539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nTechnology (navigation and robotics) usage during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often supported by literature involving high-volume surgeons and hospitals, but the value of technology for lower-volume surgeons is uncertain. This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship among surgeon volume, technology usage, and revision rate when using an optimal prosthesis combination (OPC).\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nAustralian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) data were obtained from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2022, for all primary TKA procedures performed for osteoarthritis using an OPC by a known surgeon ≥5 years after their first recorded procedure. The interaction between surgeon volume and conventional-instrumentation (CV) versus technology-assisted (TA) TKA was assessed. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was determined by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Cox proportional-hazards methods were used to compare rates of revision by surgeon volume and by the interaction of volume and technology. Subanalyses were undertaken to examine major and minor revisions separately, and to assess the influence of technology on revision rates relative to those of a surgeon undertaking 100 TKA/year.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nOf the 53,264 procedures that met the inclusion criteria, 31,536 were TA-TKA and 21,728 were CV-TKA. Use of technology reduced the all-cause revision rate for surgeons with a volume of <50 TKA/year and the rate of minor revisions for surgeons with a volume of <40 TKA/year. No interaction between surgeon volume and the rate of major revision surgery was found. With CV-TKA by a surgeon with a 100-TKA/year volume as the comparator, all-cause and major revision rates were significantly elevated for surgeons undertaking <50 and <100 TKA/year, respectively. In contrast, analysis of TA-TKA showed no difference in rates of all-cause or major revisions for surgeons undertaking <100 TKA/year compared with 100 TKA/year.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nTA-TKA was associated with a decrease in the revision rate for lower-volume surgeons but no significant alterations in revision rate for higher-volume surgeons. Preferential use of TA-TKA by lower-volume surgeons should be considered.\r\n\r\nLEVEL OF EVIDENCE\r\nTherapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.","PeriodicalId":22625,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.24.00539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Technology (navigation and robotics) usage during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often supported by literature involving high-volume surgeons and hospitals, but the value of technology for lower-volume surgeons is uncertain. This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship among surgeon volume, technology usage, and revision rate when using an optimal prosthesis combination (OPC).
METHODS
Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) data were obtained from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2022, for all primary TKA procedures performed for osteoarthritis using an OPC by a known surgeon ≥5 years after their first recorded procedure. The interaction between surgeon volume and conventional-instrumentation (CV) versus technology-assisted (TA) TKA was assessed. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was determined by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Cox proportional-hazards methods were used to compare rates of revision by surgeon volume and by the interaction of volume and technology. Subanalyses were undertaken to examine major and minor revisions separately, and to assess the influence of technology on revision rates relative to those of a surgeon undertaking 100 TKA/year.
RESULTS
Of the 53,264 procedures that met the inclusion criteria, 31,536 were TA-TKA and 21,728 were CV-TKA. Use of technology reduced the all-cause revision rate for surgeons with a volume of <50 TKA/year and the rate of minor revisions for surgeons with a volume of <40 TKA/year. No interaction between surgeon volume and the rate of major revision surgery was found. With CV-TKA by a surgeon with a 100-TKA/year volume as the comparator, all-cause and major revision rates were significantly elevated for surgeons undertaking <50 and <100 TKA/year, respectively. In contrast, analysis of TA-TKA showed no difference in rates of all-cause or major revisions for surgeons undertaking <100 TKA/year compared with 100 TKA/year.
CONCLUSIONS
TA-TKA was associated with a decrease in the revision rate for lower-volume surgeons but no significant alterations in revision rate for higher-volume surgeons. Preferential use of TA-TKA by lower-volume surgeons should be considered.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.