Comparison of outcomes and revision free survival of early arthrofibrosis management after total knee replacement: a national cohort analysis.

IF 1.4 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Parshva A Sanghvi, Crystal Xu, Jumaa Baker, Christian Hecht, Atul F Kamath
{"title":"Comparison of outcomes and revision free survival of early arthrofibrosis management after total knee replacement: a national cohort analysis.","authors":"Parshva A Sanghvi, Crystal Xu, Jumaa Baker, Christian Hecht, Atul F Kamath","doi":"10.1007/s00590-025-04245-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study examined three common treatment options for arthrofibrosis treatment after total knee arthroplasty (TKA)-manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (LOA), and revision TKA (rTKA)-and evaluated differences in medical outcomes, orthopedic outcomes, and revision free survivorship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The TriNetX platform was queried to identify patients with arthrofibrosis after TKA. Cohorts were stratified by treatment and matched based on demographics and comorbidities. Differences in short-term medical complications, long-term orthopedic complications, and revision free survivorship were assessed. Odds ratios were used to compare outcomes, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to determine survivorship.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>30,142 patients were identified with arthrofibrosis after TKA (3.61%). Within one year of diagnoses, 3,617 patients were treated with MUA, 2,022 with rTKA, 489 with LOA, and 635 patients with rTKA after MUA/LOA. At 90 days, rTKA had a higher risk of acute kidney injury, pulmonary embolism, wound dehiscence, emergency department visits, and readmission compared to MUA, and lower risk of readmission compared to patients with prior MUA/LOA (P < 0.05). At 2 years, rTKA had a higher risk of periprosthetic fracture, prosthetic dislocation, periprosthetic joint infection, and aseptic loosening compared to MUA but a lower risk of prosthetic dislocation and periprosthetic joint infection compared to patients with prior MUA/LOA (P < 0.05). Survivorship with rTKA was markedly lower than with MUA at 2-and 10-years but was comparable with prior MUA/LOA.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study found that manipulation under anesthesia may be preferred as the first-line treatment in the management of early postoperative arthrofibrosis over rTKA due to decreased short-term and long-term complication risk and increased survival rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":50484,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","volume":"35 1","pages":"128"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-025-04245-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study examined three common treatment options for arthrofibrosis treatment after total knee arthroplasty (TKA)-manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (LOA), and revision TKA (rTKA)-and evaluated differences in medical outcomes, orthopedic outcomes, and revision free survivorship.

Methods: The TriNetX platform was queried to identify patients with arthrofibrosis after TKA. Cohorts were stratified by treatment and matched based on demographics and comorbidities. Differences in short-term medical complications, long-term orthopedic complications, and revision free survivorship were assessed. Odds ratios were used to compare outcomes, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to determine survivorship.

Results: 30,142 patients were identified with arthrofibrosis after TKA (3.61%). Within one year of diagnoses, 3,617 patients were treated with MUA, 2,022 with rTKA, 489 with LOA, and 635 patients with rTKA after MUA/LOA. At 90 days, rTKA had a higher risk of acute kidney injury, pulmonary embolism, wound dehiscence, emergency department visits, and readmission compared to MUA, and lower risk of readmission compared to patients with prior MUA/LOA (P < 0.05). At 2 years, rTKA had a higher risk of periprosthetic fracture, prosthetic dislocation, periprosthetic joint infection, and aseptic loosening compared to MUA but a lower risk of prosthetic dislocation and periprosthetic joint infection compared to patients with prior MUA/LOA (P < 0.05). Survivorship with rTKA was markedly lower than with MUA at 2-and 10-years but was comparable with prior MUA/LOA.

Conclusion: This study found that manipulation under anesthesia may be preferred as the first-line treatment in the management of early postoperative arthrofibrosis over rTKA due to decreased short-term and long-term complication risk and increased survival rate.

目的:本研究考察了全膝关节置换术(TKA)后关节纤维化治疗的三种常见治疗方案--麻醉下操作(MUA)、关节镜下粘连溶解(LOA)和翻修TKA(rTKA)--并评估了医疗结果、矫形结果和无翻修存活率的差异:方法:通过查询TriNetX平台,确定TKA术后患有关节纤维化的患者。根据治疗方法对组群进行分层,并根据人口统计学和合并症进行匹配。评估短期医疗并发症、长期矫形并发症和无翻修存活率的差异。比较结果时使用了比值比,确定存活率时使用了卡普兰-梅耶分析:30,142名患者(3.61%)在TKA术后被确诊为关节纤维化。在确诊后一年内,有3617名患者接受了MUA治疗,2022名患者接受了rTKA治疗,489名患者接受了LOA治疗,635名患者在MUA/LOA治疗后接受了rTKA治疗。90天后,与MUA相比,rTKA发生急性肾损伤、肺栓塞、伤口开裂、急诊就诊和再入院的风险更高,而与之前接受过MUA/LOA的患者相比,再入院的风险更低(P 结论:rTKA与MUA相比,具有更高的风险:本研究发现,在治疗术后早期关节纤维化时,麻醉下手法复位可能比 rTKA 更受青睐,因为它能降低短期和长期并发症风险并提高存活率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
265
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology (EJOST) aims to publish high quality Orthopedic scientific work. The objective of our journal is to disseminate meaningful, impactful, clinically relevant work from each and every region of the world, that has the potential to change and or inform clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信