Background: Revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has a higher rate of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) compared with primary TJA, possibly as the result of increased allogeneic blood transfusion. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is gaining popularity in revision TJA to minimize blood loss and the need for transfusion; however, its effect on PJI reduction has yet to be investigated. The hypothesis of this study was that the administration of TXA during revision arthroplasty is protective against subsequent PJI. Methods: A prospectively maintained institutional database was used to identify patients who underwent revision TJA for aseptic failure from 2009 to 2018 and had a minimum follow-up of 90 days. Patients who developed PJI following revision arthroplasty were identified. All patients with PJI met Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify variables independently associated with PJI after aseptic revision TJA. Results: Overall, 1,731 patients who underwent aseptic revision were identified; of these patients, 83 (4.8%) developed PJI. Patients who received TXA had significantly lower rates (p = 0.029) of PJI postoperatively at 3.30% compared with those who did not receive TXA at 5.73%. After controlling for relevant confounding variables, TXA remained a significant independent factor that protected against PJI (odds ratio [OR], 0.47 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.23 to 0.90]; p = 0.030). Female sex was also identified as a significant independent factor that protected against PJI (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.88]; p = 0.016). However, preoperative anemia was independently associated with an increased risk of subsequent PJI (OR, 2.37 [95% CI, 1.34 to 4.16]; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Based on this study conducted at a single institution, the use of TXA during aseptic revision arthroplasty was independently associated with a reduced risk of subsequent acute PJI after adjusting for multiple patient characteristics and surgical factors. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the reported rates and characteristics of injuries among CrossFit athletes with specific attention to the hand and wrist. We further sought to identify trends and associations of these injuries by examining demographic data. Methods A questionnaire was created to capture self-reported information on the incidence of hand or wrist injuries and their associations in CrossFit athletes. It was distributed between April 2020 and July 2020 to athletes training at CrossFit affiliated gyms in the New York and Pennsylvania regions. Bivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors correlated with an injury. Results A total of 270 responses (97.5% response rate) were available for final analysis. The median age of respondents was 34 years and 72.2% had been participating in CrossFit for at least two years. CrossFit athletes reported injury rates of 62.2% while engaged in CrossFit training and 20.4% reported an injury specific to the hand or wrist. The majority of hand or wrist injuries occurred after one year of CrossFit training (65.4%). The majority of reported initial injuries occurred to the wrist (75.4%); subsequently, 29.1% reported reinjuring the same region. While 58.2% reported not yet having healed or taking longer than one month to feel fully healed, 72.8% reported returning to unmodified training within one month. Only 15 respondents reported seeking medical attention from a physician for their injury. Physicians generally recommended a training break of over one month, but only two patients reported taking a break this long. Male sex and length of participation in CrossFit were associated with an increased risk of developing a hand or wrist injury. Discussion Hand and wrist injuries represent a significant proportion of injuries among CrossFit athletes. CrossFit practitioners are potentially returning to unmodified training too early following injury, leaving them susceptible to further injury. Physicians and therapists must consider these findings and address both therapies and preventative measures for these types of injuries with their patients.

Objective Surgical treatment options for distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) arthritis include distal ulnar resection (DUR), DRUJ arthrodesis, and ulnar head replacement. Ulnar convergence leading to persistent pain and clicking is a relatively common complication of complete DUR and DRUJ arthrodesis with distal ulnar segment resection (DRUJA). This led to the development of the distal ulna hemiresection (DUHR) and distal ulnar stump stabilization techniques to reduce the risk of this complication. Patients may experience incomplete relief of pain and limited range of motion (ROM) with these procedures. We hypothesized that there would be no differences in outcomes between the treatment groups, but patients undergoing DUHR, tendon interposition, or distal ulnar stump stabilization would be at lower risk of complications. Methods Records were retrospectively reviewed for 121 patients undergoing DRUJ procedures between 2000 and 2018 at a single institution to collect patient demographics, surgical details, preoperative diagnosis, and outcomes including complications, revision procedures, ROM, pain, and swelling. Patients were grouped for analysis by procedure type: DUR (Darrach procedure), DUHR (Bowers procedure), and DRUJA (Sauve–Kapandji procedure). Continuous variables were compared using an analysis of variance test and categorical variables using the Freeman–Halton extension of the Fisher's exact test. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify significant predictors of outcomes. Results Seventy-three patients underwent a DUR procedure, while 33 patients underwent a DUHR procedure and 11 underwent a DRUJA procedure. Mean follow-up was 70.6 months. Patients undergoing DRUJA were significantly younger than those undergoing DUR or DUHR procedure (42.4 vs. 60.0 vs. 62.1, p < 0.001). No significant differences between groups were demonstrated in measured outcomes. Posttraumatic arthritis was the most common preoperative diagnosis (43.4%). Persistent pain was the most common negative outcome (25.6%) followed by limited ROM (19.7%). Five patients (4.3%) suffered postoperative complications, most common being rupture of extensor tendons. Five patients (4.3%) underwent revision procedures. Body mass index (BMI) was a significant predictor of persistent pain (odds ratio = 1.09, p = 0.031). Conclusion The results of our study suggest that outcomes are equivalent between the three distinct treatment groups. Despite the potential benefits, hemiresection, tendon interposition, and distal stump stabilization had no significant effect on outcomes in this study. More than a quarter (25.6%) of patients undergoing DRUJ procedures experience persistent pain postoperatively, while one-fifth (19.7%) experienced limited ROM. Patients with higher BMI are at a significantly greater risk of experiencing persistent postoperative pain. Level of Evidence This is a Level III, retrospective comparative study.