Victoria Teissier1, Nicolas Pujol2. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de Versailles, Le Chesnay, France. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de Versailles, Le Chesnay, France. npujol@ch-versailles.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to report the proportion and cause of unplanned revision surgery rates within 1 year following arthroscopic procedures. Our hypothesis was that there is a significant rate of unplanned returns (URs) occurring between 3 and 12 months after the initial procedure and that causes of revision are different when considering the delay after the index surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 4142 consecutive patients who underwent an arthroscopic procedure in a single department of orthopedics and traumatology, patients undergoing revision surgery for any reasons directly related to the primary procedure were included. Cause for revision, surgical site, delay from index procedure, and number of revisions were screened. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients underwent 97 revision surgeries (2.3%) for reasons directly related to the primary procedure. Most revision surgeries were performed after month 3 following index surgery (59 patients, 60.8%). Mean time to revision surgery was 5.3 ± 4.3 months (range 0-365 days). Usual early-onset (< 3 months) reasons for unplanned revision were surgical site infection (17 patients, 0.41%), wound-healing defect (12 patients, 0.29%), and hemorrhagic complication (7 patients, 0.17%). Reasons for delayed unplanned revision (> 3 months) were index procedure failure (21 patients, 0.51%), stiffness (18 patients, 0.43%), and removal of hardware (16 patients, 0.41%). CONCLUSIONS: Reasons for return to the operating room (OR) are different depending on the timepoint from index procedure. Patients should receive relevant information accordingly when scheduling any arthroscopic procedure, including up to 1-year potential complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, Case series, Level IV.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to report the proportion and cause of unplanned revision surgery rates within 1 year following arthroscopic procedures. Our hypothesis was that there is a significant rate of unplanned returns (URs) occurring between 3 and 12 months after the initial procedure and that causes of revision are different when considering the delay after the index surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 4142 consecutive patients who underwent an arthroscopic procedure in a single department of orthopedics and traumatology, patients undergoing revision surgery for any reasons directly related to the primary procedure were included. Cause for revision, surgical site, delay from index procedure, and number of revisions were screened. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients underwent 97 revision surgeries (2.3%) for reasons directly related to the primary procedure. Most revision surgeries were performed after month 3 following index surgery (59 patients, 60.8%). Mean time to revision surgery was 5.3 ± 4.3 months (range 0-365 days). Usual early-onset (< 3 months) reasons for unplanned revision were surgical site infection (17 patients, 0.41%), wound-healing defect (12 patients, 0.29%), and hemorrhagic complication (7 patients, 0.17%). Reasons for delayed unplanned revision (> 3 months) were index procedure failure (21 patients, 0.51%), stiffness (18 patients, 0.43%), and removal of hardware (16 patients, 0.41%). CONCLUSIONS: Reasons for return to the operating room (OR) are different depending on the timepoint from index procedure. Patients should receive relevant information accordingly when scheduling any arthroscopic procedure, including up to 1-year potential complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, Case series, Level IV.
Authors: Pierre Ranger; Alexandre Renaud; Philippe Phan; Philippe Dahan; Eros De Oliveira; Josee Delisle Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2010-11-24 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Matthew J Hartwell; Allison M Morgan; Daniel J Johnson; Richard W Nicolay; Robert A Christian; Ryan S Selley; Michael A Terry; Vehniah K Tjong Journal: J Knee Surg Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: William L Healy; Richard Iorio; Andrew J Clair; Vincent D Pellegrini; Craig J Della Valle; Keith R Berend Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Hilal Maradit Kremers; Stephanie R Schilz; Holly K Van Houten; Jeph Herrin; Karl M Koenig; Kevin J Bozic; Daniel J Berry Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Rajitha Gunaratne; Dylan N Pratt; Joseph Banda; Daniel P Fick; Riaz J K Khan; Brett W Robertson Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Jessica Hanley; Robert Westermann; Shane Cook; Natalie Glass; Ned Amendola; Brian R Wolf; Matthew Bollier Journal: J Knee Surg Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: N Pujol; J Merrer; B Lemaire; P Boisrenoult; P Desmoineaux; P Oger; C Lebas; P Beaufils Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 2.256
Authors: Julien Billières; Charlotte Labruyère; Camille Steltzlen; Amanda Gonzalez; Philippe Boisrenoult; Philippe Beaufils; Nicolas Pujol Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 2.256