Dataset Information

Increased Risk of Perioperative Complications in Dialysis Patients Following Rotator Cuff Repairs and Knee Arthroscopy.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine the effects of dialysis on postoperative and perioperative complications following rotator cuff repair (RCR) and knee arthroscopy (KA).

Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) was queried from 2006 to 2018. Groups were matched for age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative functional status, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status. Chi-squared tests and Fisher's exact tests were used to analyze the comorbidities. Differences in occurrences of postoperative adverse events (AE), mortality within 30 days, reoperations with 30 days, extended hospital stay (≥2 days), and readmissions within 30 days were analyzed using the Mantel-Haenszel test. Sign tests were used to evaluate differences in operative time, as well as length of hospital stay.

Results

Dialysis patients in both the RCR and KA groups had greater odds of experiencing any AE (OR: 6.33 and 7.46, P value: .031 and <.001, respectively) and readmission within 30 days (OR: 10.5 and 4.1, P value: .015 and .014, respectively). They also had significantly greater operating times (P = .049 for both). Dialysis patients undergoing KA had greater odds of staying in the hospital ≥2 days (OR: 10, P = <.001) and being reoperated on within 30 days (OR: 3.78, P = .033). The total hospital stay was significantly greater for dialysis patients in the KA group (P < .001) but not in the RCR group (P = .088). None of the individual AE's significantly differed between the dialysis and non-dialysis patients in the RCR cohort; however, dialysis patients in the KA cohort had greater incidences of three AE's.

Conclusions

This study identified significantly worse short-term complication rates in dialysis patients undergoing RCR and KA. Careful preoperative evaluation and postoperative surveillance are warranted in this high-risk patient group. Patients should be counseled appropriately on the increased complication risks associated with RCR and KA surgeries.

Level of evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

SUBMITTER: Kothandaraman V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8689219 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo determine whether anterior cable tears could be identified at the time of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and determine the characteristics of the anterior cable tears identified.MethodsFrom 2016 to 2017 all shoulder arthroscopies had data collected prospectively at the time of surgery, specifically including injury to the capsular and tendon zones of insertion on the greater tuberosity. Anterior cable position and degree of injury and medialization were recorded, as well as complete findings of the diagnostic arthroscopy. The inclusion criterion was primary shoulder arthroscopy. The exclusion criterion was any revision shoulder arthroscopy. All arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs (ARCR) were grouped together and all other nonarthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgeries (non-ARCR) were grouped together.ResultsIn total, 118 shoulder arthroscopies had data collected prospectively at the time of surgery: 90 primary shoulder arthroscopies met the inclusion criteria; 28 were excluded because they were revision surgeries. There were 42 patients in the ARCR group (Group 1). Six of these were partial tears, and 36 were full-thickness tears. There were 48 patients in the non-ARCR group (Group 2). The non-ARCR Group 2 served as an anatomic baseline for ARCR Group 1. In all 90 shoulders, the rotator cable and anterior cable were identified. Group 1 (ARCR) incidence of anterior cable tears with abnormal position was 71.4% compared to 2.1% in group 2 (non-ARCR) (P < .001) Group 1 (ARCR) incidence of anterior cable tears with normal anterior cable position (n = 12) was compared to abnormal anterior cable position (n = 30). Injury to the anterior footprint capsular and tendon zones were compared. Normal anterior cable position correlated with no or low-grade injury to anterior footprint capsular zone. (Nimura zone C1). Abnormal anterior cable displacement graded as moderate (n = 20) and severe (n = 10) were compared for injury to the anterior footprint. Moderate displacement correlated with complete or high grade injury to C1 in 85% and complete injury to R1 in 45% (P < .001 and .049). In severe displacement complete C1 injury was 100%, and complete R1 injury was 100% (P < .001 and .001).ConclusionsAnterior cable tears are universally identified in ARCR. Three patterns of medial displacement severity correlated with injury to a crucial insertion zone (C1) at the anterior footprint. The degree of anterior cable disruption at the anterior footprint and displacement was commonly disproportionately greater than the injury to the supraspinatus.Level of evidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.

Project description:PurposeTo compare publicly available rehabilitation protocols designated for rotator cuff (RTC) repairs published online by academic residency programs and private practice institutions.MethodsA systematic electronic search using the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access System (FREIDA) was performed for RTC repair rehabilitation protocols. Private practice programs with published rehabilitation protocols that were discovered during the Google search were also included for review, but no comprehensive search for private practice protocols was performed. The main exclusion criteria consisted of non-English-language protocols and protocols without any of the time-based components in question. Included protocols were assessed independently based on the specified RTC tear size (small [≤1 cm], medium [1-4 cm], large or massive [≥5 cm], or no mention of size). Protocols were compared based on the inclusion, exclusion, and timing of certain rehabilitation components.ResultsA total of 96 rehabilitation protocols were included for review, from 39 academic institutions and 28 private practice programs. Specific instructions for concomitant biceps tenodesis were included in 26 protocols (27.1%). Of the 96 protocols, 88 (91.7%) did not place restrictions on early postoperative passive range of motion (PROM) of the shoulder. Isolated PROM with restrictions on active range of motion was most commonly recommended for the first 4 or 6 weeks postoperatively (80.2%). Use of a sling or immobilizer was most frequently recommended for the first 4 or 6 weeks postoperatively (78.1%). Wide variation was noted in recommendations for returning to resistance strengthening, with the highest incidence being 27 protocols recommending returning at 12 weeks (28.1%); this further varied based on the size of the tear. A total of 21 protocols (21.9%) recommended the use of cryotherapy postoperatively.ConclusionsAlthough certain rehabilitation components were common, such as duration of PROM and sling or immobilizer use, a large degree of variation remains among published rehabilitation protocols after RTC repair, and this variability is still seen even when subdividing by the size or severity of the RTC tear.Clinical relevanceRehabilitation after RTC repair is crucial to patient outcomes. This study summarizes the variability among online rehabilitation protocols for RTC repair in the United States and emphasizes the importance of appropriate rehabilitation after RTC surgery.

Project description:Rotator cuff tears are a common cause for pain and reduced function. Tears of the tendons of the cuff can be a result of a degenerative process or as a consequence of trauma. Management of cuff tears are surrounded by controversy from indications for surgical management to rehabilitation protocol post-surgical repair. The aim of post surgical rehabilitation is to improve functional outcome, reduce pain and promote tendon healing. In the case of rotator cuff repair, rehabilitation can be broadly divided into early passive range of motion (EPM) and delayed range of motion (DRM). The EPM regime is defined by minimal immobilisation of the shoulder and passive mobilisation of the joint within the first post-operative period. In contrast, DRM immobilises the shoulder joint up to six weeks post-operatively. Proponents of EPM state various advantages of their rehabilitation protocol including improved range of motion and earlier return to normal activities of daily living. However, there has also been concern that this rehabilitation regime may result in an increased rate of re-rupture. Since this is a highly controversial issue, various high quality literature have been published looking to clarify which regime is best following rotator cuff surgery. Reviewing these articles, it appears that there is an increase rate of re-tear of the repaired rotator cuff tendon when the EPM regime is employed. Statistical significance however was limited by small sample sizes. Range of motion post-repair also appears to be associated with post-operative rehabilitation regime. As expected, the EPM regime has been shown to improve range of motion post-repair. Despite this, literature reports patients managed with the DPM showed a statistically better patient reported outcome measure. We conclude that based on the evidence we currently have, early range of motion post rotator cuff repair is related with an increase risk of re-tear. The DPM regime reduces this risk with the possible complication of reduced range of shoulder movement. This problem is thought to be an easier clinical issue to deal with compared to re-rupture of the repaired rotator cuff tendon. There is however lack of data to achieve statistical significance in most of these analysis. There is a definite need for a large, multi-centre single blinded randomised controlled trial to further shed light on this controversial topic.