Background: This study aims to identify the incidence and risk factors of periprosthetic infections following endoprosthetic reconstruction of femoral metastatic bone disease (MBD). In this population with MBD, the marked impact of infection on the patient’s systemic treatment highlights the importance of understanding both the incidence and associated risk factors. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included a total of 140 patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD at a tertiary referral hospital in South Korea between 2009 and 2019. Infection-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards model analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors associated with periprosthetic infection. Results: The incidence of periprosthetic infection in patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD was 9% (12 out of 140 patients). Risk factors for periprosthetic infection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as the primary tumor (hazard ratio [HR], 6.08; 95% CI, 1.63–22.6; p = 0.007) and low preoperative absolute neutrophil count (HR, 6.99; 95% CI, 1.79–27.4; p = 0.005). Conclusions Patients with femoral MBD had a 9% risk of developing a periprosthetic infection. Given their limited life expectancy, this translated to a substantial rate of 58.9 infections per 1,000 person-joint-years. Possible risk factors for periprosthetic infection were low preoperative absolute neutrophil count and HCC as the primary tumor. The high incidence of periprosthetic infection and its associated risk factors should be considered in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD.

Background: This study aims to identify the incidence and risk factors of periprosthetic infections following endoprosthetic reconstruction of femoral metastatic bone disease (MBD). In this population with MBD, the marked impact of infection on the patient’s systemic treatment highlights the importance of understanding both the incidence and associated risk factors. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included a total of 140 patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD at a tertiary referral hospital in South Korea between 2009 and 2019. Infection-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards model analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors associated with periprosthetic infection. Results: The incidence of periprosthetic infection in patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD was 9% (12 out of 140 patients). Risk factors for periprosthetic infection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as the primary tumor (hazard ratio [HR], 6.08; 95% CI, 1.63–22.6; p = 0.007) and low preoperative absolute neutrophil count (HR, 6.99; 95% CI, 1.79–27.4; p = 0.005). Conclusions Patients with femoral MBD had a 9% risk of developing a periprosthetic infection. Given their limited life expectancy, this translated to a substantial rate of 58.9 infections per 1,000 person-joint-years. Possible risk factors for periprosthetic infection were low preoperative absolute neutrophil count and HCC as the primary tumor. The high incidence of periprosthetic infection and its associated risk factors should be considered in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD.

Background: This study aims to identify the incidence and risk factors of periprosthetic infections following endoprosthetic reconstruction of femoral metastatic bone disease (MBD). In this population with MBD, the marked impact of infection on the patient’s systemic treatment highlights the importance of understanding both the incidence and associated risk factors. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included a total of 140 patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD at a tertiary referral hospital in South Korea between 2009 and 2019. Infection-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards model analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors associated with periprosthetic infection. Results: The incidence of periprosthetic infection in patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD was 9% (12 out of 140 patients). Risk factors for periprosthetic infection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as the primary tumor (hazard ratio [HR], 6.08; 95% CI, 1.63–22.6; p = 0.007) and low preoperative absolute neutrophil count (HR, 6.99; 95% CI, 1.79–27.4; p = 0.005). Conclusions Patients with femoral MBD had a 9% risk of developing a periprosthetic infection. Given their limited life expectancy, this translated to a substantial rate of 58.9 infections per 1,000 person-joint-years. Possible risk factors for periprosthetic infection were low preoperative absolute neutrophil count and HCC as the primary tumor. The high incidence of periprosthetic infection and its associated risk factors should be considered in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD.

Background: This study aims to identify the incidence and risk factors of periprosthetic infections following endoprosthetic reconstruction of femoral metastatic bone disease (MBD). In this population with MBD, the marked impact of infection on the patient’s systemic treatment highlights the importance of understanding both the incidence and associated risk factors. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included a total of 140 patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD at a tertiary referral hospital in South Korea between 2009 and 2019. Infection-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards model analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors associated with periprosthetic infection. Results: The incidence of periprosthetic infection in patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD was 9% (12 out of 140 patients). Risk factors for periprosthetic infection were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as the primary tumor (hazard ratio [HR], 6.08; 95% CI, 1.63–22.6; p = 0.007) and low preoperative absolute neutrophil count (HR, 6.99; 95% CI, 1.79–27.4; p = 0.005). Conclusions Patients with femoral MBD had a 9% risk of developing a periprosthetic infection. Given their limited life expectancy, this translated to a substantial rate of 58.9 infections per 1,000 person-joint-years. Possible risk factors for periprosthetic infection were low preoperative absolute neutrophil count and HCC as the primary tumor. The high incidence of periprosthetic infection and its associated risk factors should be considered in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for femoral MBD.

Background: Mechanical failures of tumor endoprosthesis in the distal femur usually require revision surgery. We investigated if the proximal femur host bone can be salvaged by onlay and overlapping allograft in revision surgeries due to aseptic loosening and stem fractures. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 18 patients (7 men and 11 women) with osteosarcoma around the knee. The entire cohort was classified into three subgroups (no bone graft: 6, onlay allograft: 7, and overlapping allograft: 5) according to our treatment strategy. Results: The median interval from the initial surgery to the revision was 94.5 months (range, 21–219 months), and the median follow-up period from the revision surgery was 88.0 months (range, 24–179 months). At the last follow-up, 9 of the 18 patients maintained their endoprostheses, and the 5-year prosthesis survival rate was 57.9%. Limb survival was 100%. Five-year prosthesis survival rate was 66.7% in the no bone graft group, 85.7% in the onlay allograft group while 30.0% in the overlapping allograft group. In the no bone graft group and onlay allograft group, 66.7% (4/6) and 57.1% (4/7) maintained their revision prostheses while no prostheses survived in the overlapping allograft group. Recurrent stem loosening was observed in 14.2% (1/7) and 60.0% (3/5) of the onlay allograft and overlapping allograft groups, respectively, despite allograft bone union. The complication rate was 66.7% (12/18) in the entire cohort. The most common type of complication was infection (n = 6), followed by aseptic loosening (n = 4) and mechanical failure (n = 2). Conclusions This study indicates that onlay allograft can be used as a supportive method in revising failed endoprosthesis if the extent of host bone destruction is extensive. However, applying overlapping allograft to secure bone stock showed a high rate of mechanical failures and infection in the long term. Future studies with a larger cohort are necessary to assess the prognostic factors for the higher complication rate in overlapping allograft and the need for overlapping allograft. Surveillance with consideration of the risk of anteromedial osteolysis in allograft and efforts for prevention of periprosthetic infection are essential.

Background and Objectives: Identifying patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) is important when making decisions for antiplatelet therapy strategy. This study evaluated the impact of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) according to HBR in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated with drug eluting stents (DESs). Methods: In this post-hoc analysis of the TICO trial, HBR was defined by 2 approaches: meeting Academic Research Consortium for HBR (ARC-HBR) criteria or Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent DAPT (PRECISEDAPT) score ≥25. The primary outcome was a 3–12 months net adverse clinical event (composite of major bleeding and adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events). Results: Of the 2,980 patients without adverse events during the first 3 months after DES implantation, 453 (15.2%) were HBR by ARC-HBR criteria and 504 (16.9%) were HBR by PRECISE-DAPT score. The primary outcome rate was higher in HBR versus non-HBR patients (by ARC-HBR criteria: hazard ratio [HR], 2.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.76– 4.69; p<0.001; by PRECISE-DAPT score: HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.92–4.98; p<0.001). Ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT was associated with lower primary outcome rate than ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT regardless of HBR by ARC-HBR criteria, with similar magnitudes of therapy effect for HBR and non-HBR patients (p-interaction=0.400). Results were consistent by PRECISE-DAPT score (p-interaction=0.178). Conclusions In ACS patients treated with DESs, ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT was associated with lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes regardless of HBR, with similar magnitudes of therapy effect between HBR and non-HBR.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02494895

Purpose: Periprosthetic fractures of a tumor prosthesis are rare but have difficulties in achieving sound fixation because of the poor bone quality, which increases the risk of loosening or re-fracture, even after bone union. A cortical strut onlay allograft was adopted for peri-prosthetic fractures after hip arthroplasty into the periprosthetic fracture of a tumor prosthesis, assuming that it would assist in firm fixation, shorten the time to union, and increase the bone stock, thereby, lower the chance of loosening and re-fracture. Materials and Methods: This study reviewed 27 patients (30 cases) of periprosthetic fracture of tumor prosthesis. Sixteen cases (allograft group) had augmentation with an onlay allograft, while 14 cases (conventional group) had internal fixation or conservative treatment.The following were assessed; mode of periprosthetic fracture, difference in the time to union between a strut cortical onlay allograft and without it, and survival of prosthesis, complication, and functional outcome between the two groups. Results: According to the unified classification system (UCS), 21 cases were type B (70.0%; B1, 14; B2, 1; B3, 6) and 9 cases were type C.The five-, 10-year survival of the 30 reconstructions by Kaplan–Meier plot was 84.5%±4.18% and 42.2%±7.83%, respectively. The average time to bone union of the entire cohort was 5.1 months (range, 2.0–11.2 months). The allograft group (3.5 months) showed a shorter period for union than the conventional group (7.2 months) (p<0.0001). All four cases of major complications occurred in the conventional group. Two cases with loosening and anterior angulation were treated with a change of prosthesis, and another with infection underwent amputation. The remaining case with loosening had conservative management. At the final follow-up, the average Musculosketal Tumor Society score of the allograft group (26.1) was better than that of the conventional group (20.9). Conclusion Bone union in periprosthetic fractures of a tumor prosthesis can be achieved, but the minimization of complications is important. An onlay allograft facilitates firm fixation and increases the bone stock with a shortened time to union. This simple method can minimize the risk of loosening, joint contracture, and re-fracture.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The relationship between operator volume and outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been fully investigated. We aimed to investigate the relationship between operator PCI volume and in-hospital outcomes after primary PCI for STEMI. METHODS: Among the total of 44,967 consecutive cases of PCI enrolled in the Korean nationwide, retrospective registry (K-PCI registry), 8,282 patients treated with PCI for STEMI by 373 operators were analyzed. PCI volumes above the 75th percentile (>30 cases/year), between the 75th and 25th percentile (10–30 cases/year), and below the 25th percentile (<10 cases/year) were defined as high, moderate, and low-volume operators, respectively. In-hospital outcomes including mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, stroke, and urgent repeat PCI were analyzed. RESULTS: The average number of primary PCI cases performed by 373 operators was 22.2 in a year. In-hospital mortality after PCI for STEMI was 571 cases (6.9%). In-hospital outcomes by operator volume showed no significant differences in the death rate, cardiac death, non-fatal MI, and stent thrombosis. However, the rate of urgent repeat PCI tended to be lower in the high-volume operator (0.6%) than in the moderate-(0.7%)/low-(1.5%) volume operator groups (p=0.095). The adjusted odds ratios for adverse in-hospital outcomes were similar in the 3 groups. Multivariate analysis also showed that operator volume was not a predictor for adverse in-hospital outcomes. CONCLUSIONS In-hospital outcomes after primary PCI for STEMI were not associated with operator volume in the K-PCI registry.

Background and Objectives: Whether beta blockers favorably impact the clinical outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains in debate. We investigated the impact of beta blocker on major clinical outcomes during 2 years after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with AMI. Methods: All patients with the first AMI treated with PCI for the period of 2005 to 2014 from the Korean National Health Insurance Service claims database were enrolled. We defined the regular user as medication possession ratio (MPR) ≥80% and non-user as MPR=0%. We compared the occurrence of all cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke according to adherence of beta-blockers. A 1:1 propensity score-matching was conducted to adjust for between-group differences. Results: We identified a total 81,752 patients with met eligible criteria. At discharge, 63,885 (78%) patients were prescribed beta blockers. For 2 years follow up period, regular users were 53,991 (66%) patients, non-users were 10,991 (13%). In the propensity score matched population, regular use of beta blocker was associated with a 36% reduced risk of composite adverse events (all death, MI or stroke) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.636; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.555–0.728; p<0.001). Compared to no use of beta blocker, regular use significantly reduced all death (HR, 0.736; 95% CI, 0.668–0.812; p<0.001), MI (HR, 0.729; 95% CI, 0.611–0.803; p<0.001) and stroke (HR, 0.717; 95% CI, 0.650–0.791; p<0.001). Conclusions Prescription of beta blocker in patients with AMI after PCI was sequentially increased. Continuous regular use of beta blocker for 2 years after AMI reduced major adverse events compared to no use of beta blocker.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The relationship between operator volume and outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been fully investigated. We aimed to investigate the relationship between operator PCI volume and in-hospital outcomes after primary PCI for STEMI.METHODS: Among the total of 44,967 consecutive cases of PCI enrolled in the Korean nationwide, retrospective registry (K-PCI registry), 8,282 patients treated with PCI for STEMI by 373 operators were analyzed. PCI volumes above the 75th percentile (>30 cases/year), between the 75th and 25th percentile (10–30 cases/year), and below the 25th percentile (<10 cases/year) were defined as high, moderate, and low-volume operators, respectively. In-hospital outcomes including mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, stroke, and urgent repeat PCI were analyzed.RESULTS: The average number of primary PCI cases performed by 373 operators was 22.2 in a year. In-hospital mortality after PCI for STEMI was 571 cases (6.9%). In-hospital outcomes by operator volume showed no significant differences in the death rate, cardiac death, non-fatal MI, and stent thrombosis. However, the rate of urgent repeat PCI tended to be lower in the high-volume operator (0.6%) than in the moderate-(0.7%)/low-(1.5%) volume operator groups (p=0.095). The adjusted odds ratios for adverse in-hospital outcomes were similar in the 3 groups. Multivariate analysis also showed that operator volume was not a predictor for adverse in-hospital outcomes.CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital outcomes after primary PCI for STEMI were not associated with operator volume in the K-PCI registry.
Cohort Studies ; Death ; Hospital Mortality ; Humans ; Mortality ; Multivariate Analysis ; Myocardial Infarction ; Odds Ratio ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ; Retrospective Studies ; Stents ; Stroke ; Thrombosis ; Treatment Outcome