Background: With an increasing number of primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (ACLRs), the burden of revision ACLR (rACLR) has also increased. Graft choice for rACLR is complicated by patient factors and the remaining available graft options. Purpose: To examine the association between graft type at the time of rACLR and the risk of repeat rACLR (rrACLR) in a large US integrated health care system registry while accounting for patient and surgical factors at the time of revision surgery. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data from the Kaiser Permanente ACLR registry were used to identify patients who underwent a primary isolated ACLR between 2005 and 2020 and then went on to have rACLR. Graft type used at rACLR, classified as autograft versus allograft, was the exposure of interest. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the risk of rrACLR, with ipsilateral and contralateral reoperation as secondary outcomes. Models included factors at the time of the rACLR (age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, staged revision, femoral fixation, tibial fixation, femoral tunnel method, lateral meniscal injury, medial meniscal injury, and cartilage injury) and a factor from the primary ACLR (activity at injury) as covariates. Results: A total of 1747 rACLR procedures were included. The crude cumulative rrACLR incidence at 8-year follow-up was 13.9% for allograft and 6.0% for autograft. Cumulative ipsilateral reoperation incidence at 8-year follow-up was 18.3% for allograft and 18.9% for autograft; contralateral reoperation cumulative incidence was 4.3% for allograft and 6.8% for autograft. With adjustment for covariates, a 70% lower risk for rrACLR was observed for autograft compared with allograft (hazard ratio [HR], 0.30; 95% CI, 0.18-0.50; P < .0001). No differences were observed for ipsilateral reoperation (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.73-1.51; P = .78) or contralateral reoperation (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.60-2.97; P = .48). Conclusion: The use of autograft at rACLR was associated with a 70% lower risk of rrACLR compared with allograft in this cohort from the Kaiser Permanente ACLR registry. When accounting for all reoperations outside of rrACLR after rACLR, the authors found no significant difference in risk between autograft and allograft. To minimize the risk of rrACLR, surgeons should consider using autograft for rACLR when possible.

Background: Hamstring autograft (HA) is a popular graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Although multiple studies have demonstrated that increasing the graft diameter decreases the risk of failure or revision surgery, the exact minimum graft diameter remains controversial, with the unofficial standard being 8 mm. Purpose: To evaluate the risk of aseptic revision after HA-ACLR in patients aged ≤25 years, comparing graft diameters of (1) 8 mm. A secondary purpose was to determine whether there was a threshold for graft diameter that best identifies patients at a higher risk of aseptic revision. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 5972 primary HA-ACLRs were identified using data from the ACLR registry of Kaiser Permanente. Propensity score–weighted Cox regression was used to evaluate revision risk for HAs with 8 mm diameter. An effect plot and receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC) analysis were also created to model the probability of revision based on the HA diameter to determine whether there was a specific diameter threshold to minimize revision risk. Results: In the propensity score–weighted Cox model, 8 mm grafts (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.06-1.66]; P = .015). In receiver operating characteristic analysis, an HA diameter that best identified patients at a higher risk for revision after ACLR could not be identified (AUC, 0.56). However, the adjusted effect plot showed a direct decrease in revision risk with each increasing increment in graft size. Conclusion: A 32% higher risk of revision was observed in smaller graft diameter groups (8 mm), regardless of specific diameter cutoff. In a cohort of almost 6000 HA-ACLR, the authors were unable to determine a definitive minimum graft diameter threshold that should be used.

Among people living with HIV (PWH), there has been an increasing incidence of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and metabolic abnormalities, including dyslipidemia, which can modulate NSCLC risk. In this article, we evaluate which metabolic risk factors are associated with incident risk among PWH who smoke. This is done through a retrospective cohort study, using data of HIV+ veterans who smoke from the nationwide Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. Data on diagnostic codes, medication, and laboratory values of 33,351 veterans were obtained using the VA’s Corporate Data Warehouse and Central Cancer Registry. We calculated NSCLC incidence and utilized Cox regression to determine metabolic factors associated with NSCLC risk. HIV+ cohort was 97.4% male; median age = 47 years and 20,050 (60.1%) well-controlled (≥80% follow-up time undetectable viral load). Crude incidence rates were lower in well-controlled PWH (1.46 vs. 2.06/1000 PY). Metabolic factors associated with incident NSCLC risk included lower BMI at HIV diagnosis and cachexia history in both groups, while HDL and triglycerides were significant in non-well-controlled smokers only. Our findings that lower BMI at HIV diagnosis, history of cachexia among individuals with well-controlled HIV, and cachexia presence at diagnosis are associated with increased risk of developing NSCLC in PWH with a history of smoking have important implications.

Background: Although the majority of intertrochanteric femoral fractures in the United States are now treated with cephalomedullary nailing, it remains uncertain whether differences in clinical performance by nail type exist. The purpose of this study was to compare the aseptic revision rates associated with the 3 most commonly utilized cephalomedullary nails in the United States today: the Gamma nail (Stryker), the INTERTAN (Smith+Nephew), and the Trochanteric Fixation Nail/Trochanteric Fixation Nail Advanced (TFN/TFNA; DePuy Synthes). Methods: Using an integrated health-care system’s hip fracture registry, patients ≥60 years of age who were treated with 1 of these 3 commonly used cephalomedullary nail devices were identified. Potential confounders were identified and controlled for, including age, gender, race or ethnicity, body mass index, smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, anesthesia type, Elixhauser comorbidities, and the operating surgeon. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to evaluate the risk of aseptic revision (the primary outcome measure) by cephalomedullary nail type, with mortality and revisions unrelated to the index fracture considered as competing events. Results: There were 19,215 patients included in the study sample (71.4% female, 77.0% White), including 4,421 in the Gamma nail group, 2,350 in the INTERTAN nail group, and 12,444 in the TFN/TFNA nail group. In the multivariable analysis involving nails of all lengths, the INTERTAN group was found to have a higher risk of aseptic revision compared with the TFN/TFNA group (8-year crude revision rate, 2.9% compared with 1.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.62 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.15 to 2.27]; p = 0.006). The increased risk associated with the INTERTAN nail was primarily seen among the long nails (HR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.87]; p = 0.009) rather than the short nails (HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.87 to 2.11]; p = 0.18). There were no differences in aseptic revision observed between the Gamma group and the TFN/TFNA group. Conclusions: In this study of 19,215 patients with a hip fracture treated with cephalomedullary nailing, the INTERTAN nail was found to have a significantly higher risk of aseptic revision. Further research is required to determine whether these results could be related to the unique design of this implant. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: While some prior research has shown helical blades to have higher risks of fixation failure and cut-out than lag screws in the cephalomedullary nailing of intertrochanteric femoral fractures, other studies have not demonstrated any such differences. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of helical blade and lag screw fixation among older patients with a hip fracture treated with cephalomedullary nailing and to determine whether the relative performance of these 2 fixation methods varies on the basis of patient characteristics. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized the hip fracture registry of an integrated health-care system to identify patients ≥60 years old who underwent cephalomedullary nailing with a helical blade or lag screw from 2009 to 2023. Propensity score-weighted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the risk of aseptic revision (the primary outcome measure) and the risks of revision for specific reasons (the secondary outcome measures), with mortality considered as a competing risk. Results: The study sample included 22,308 cases (11,877 with a helical blade and 10,431 with a lag screw; mean patient age, 81.7 years; 71.5% female; 73.3% White; 71.8% with an American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] classification of ≥3). The 10-year cumulative incidence of aseptic revision was 1.69% (n = 194) in the helical blade group and 1.88% (n = 182) in the lag screw group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.11; p = 0.27). There was evidence of effect modification by ASA classification, with the helical blade outperforming the lag screw in patients with an ASA of 1 to 2 (aseptic revision incidence, 1.74% versus 2.56%; adjusted HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.98; p = 0.04) but not in those with an ASA of ≥3 (aseptic revision incidence, 1.72% versus 1.64%; adjusted HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.35; p = 0.85). There was no evidence of effect modification by age or sex. Conclusions: In this study of geriatric patients with a hip fracture treated with cephalomedullary nailing, helical blade and lag screw fixation performed similarly overall. Our finding that helical blade fixation may perform better in healthier (ASA 1 to 2) geriatric patients is interesting and deserves further investigation. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.