J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2021 Nov 17;103(22):2089-2095. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.20.02231.

Complications of Hardware Removal.

The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume

Patrick J Kellam, John Harrast, Maxwell Weinberg, David F Martin, Nathan P Davidson, Charles L Saltzman

PMID: 34398858 DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.20.02231

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While hardware removal may improve patient function, the procedure carries risks of unexpected outcomes. Despite being among the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures, scant attention has been given to its complication profile.

METHODS: We queried the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) de-identified database of Part II surgical case lists from 2013 through 2019 for American Medical Association Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) implant-removal codes (20680, 20670, 22850, 22852, 22855, 26320). Hardware removal procedures that were performed without any other concurrent procedure ("HR-only procedures") were examined for associated complications.

RESULTS: In the 7 years analyzed, 13,089 HR-only procedures were performed, representing 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1% to 2.2%) of the total of 609,150 surgical procedures during that period. A complication was reported to have occurred in association with 1,256 procedures (9.6% [95% CI, 9.1% to 10.1%]), with surgical complications reported in association with 1,151 procedures (8.8% [95% CI, 8.3% to 9.3%]) and medical/anesthetic complications reported in association with 196 procedures (1.5% [95% CI, 1.3% to 1.7%]). Wound-healing delay/failure (2.1% [95% CI, 1.8% to 2.3%]) and infection (1.6% [95% CI, 1.4% to 1.8%]) were among the most commonly reported complications after HR-only procedures, but other serious events were reported as well, including unexpected reoperations (2.5% [95% CI, 2.2% to 2.7%]), unexpected readmissions (1.6% [95% CI, 1.4% to 1.8%]), continuing pain (95% CI, 1.2% [1.0% to 1.4%]), nerve injury (0.6% [95% CI, 0.4% to 0.7%]), bone fracture (0.5% [95% CI, 0.4% to 0.6%]), and life-threatening complications (0.4% [95% CI, 0.3% to 0.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS: Hardware removal is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures and was associated with an overall complication rate of 9.6% (95% CI, 9.1% to 10.1%) in a cohort of recently trained orthopaedic surgeons in the United States. Although specific complications such as infection, refractures, and nerve damage were reported to have relatively low rates of occurrence, and associated life-threatening complications occurred rarely, surgeons and patients should be aware that hardware removal carries a definite risk.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Copyright © 2021 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.

Conflict of interest statement

References

1. Hanson B, van der Werken C, Stengel D. Surgeons’ beliefs and perceptions about removal of orthopaedic implants. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008 May 24;9:73. - PubMed
2. Busam ML, Esther RJ, Obremskey WT. Hardware removal: indications and expectations. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006 Feb;14(2):113-20. - PubMed
3. Minkowitz RB, Bhadsavle S, Walsh M, Egol KA. Removal of painful orthopaedic implants after fracture union. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Sep;89(9):1906-12. - PubMed
4. Jamil W, Allami M, Choudhury MZ, Mann C, Bagga T, Roberts A. Do orthopaedic surgeons need a policy on the removal of metalwork? A descriptive national survey of practicing surgeons in the United Kingdom. Injury. 2008 Mar;39(3):362-7. Epub 2008 Feb 1. - PubMed
5. Loder RT, Feinberg JR. Orthopaedic implants in children: survey results regarding routine removal by the pediatric and nonpediatric specialists. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006 Jul-Aug;26(4):510-9. - PubMed
6. Haseeb M, Butt MF, Altaf T, Muzaffar K, Gupta A, Jallu A. Indications of implant removal: A study of 83 cases. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2017 Jan-Mar;11(1):1-7. - PubMed
7. Jacobsen S, Honnens de Lichtenberg M, Jensen CM, Tørholm C. Removal of internal fixation—the effect on patients’ complaints: a study of 66 cases of removal of internal fixation after malleolar fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 1994 Apr;15(4):170-1. - PubMed
8. Brown OL, Dirschl DR, Obremskey WT. Incidence of hardware-related pain and its effect on functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2001 May;15(4):271-4. - PubMed
9. Court-Brown CM, Gustilo T, Shaw AD. Knee pain after intramedullary tibial nailing: its incidence, etiology, and outcome. J Orthop Trauma. 1997 Feb-Mar;11(2):103-5. - PubMed
10. Keating JF, Orfaly R, O’Brien PJ. Knee pain after tibial nailing. J Orthop Trauma. 1997 Jan;11(1):10-3. - PubMed
11. Reith G, Schmitz-Greven V, Hensel KO, Schneider MM, Tinschmann T, Bouillon B, Probst C. Metal implant removal: benefits and drawbacks—a patient survey. BMC Surg. 2015 Aug 7;15:96. - PubMed
12. Dodenhoff RM, Dainton JN, Hutchins PM. Proximal thigh pain after femoral nailing. Causes and treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997 Sep;79(5):738-41. - PubMed
13. Vos DI, Verhofstad MH. Indications for implant removal after fracture healing: a review of the literature. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2013 Aug;39(4):327-37. Epub 2013 Apr 12. - PubMed
14. Sanderson PL, Ryan W, Turner PG. Complications of metalwork removal. Injury. 1992;23(1):29-30. - PubMed
15. Richards RH, Palmer JD, Clarke NM. Observations on removal of metal implants. Injury. 1992;23(1):25-8. - PubMed
16. Langkamer VG, Ackroyd CE. Removal of forearm plates. A review of the complications. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990 Jul;72(4):601-4. - PubMed
17. Deluca PA, Lindsey RW, Ruwe PA. Refracture of bones of the forearm after the removal of compression plates. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988 Oct;70(9):1372-6. - PubMed
18. Labosky DA, Cermak MB, Waggy CA. Forearm fracture plates: to remove or not to remove. J Hand Surg Am. 1990 Mar;15(2):294-301. - PubMed
19. Beaupre GS, Csongradi JJ. Refracture risk after plate removal in the forearm. J Orthop Trauma. 1996;10(2):87-92. - PubMed
20. Hurwitz SR. American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, Inc.: Rules and Procedures for Residency Education, Part I, and Part II Examinations. 2014. Accessed 2018 October 9. https://www.abos.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Part-I-and-II-RP-2021_03_09.pdf - PubMed
21. Martin D, American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Executive Medical Director. Personal communication; 2020. - PubMed
22. Kahle WK. The case against routine metal removal. J Pediatr Orthop. 1994 Mar-Apr;14(2):229-37. - PubMed
23. Degen RM, Camp CL, Bernard JA, Dines DM, Altchek DW, Dines JS. Current Trends in Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Surgery Among Newly Trained Orthopaedic Surgeons. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017 Feb;25(2):140-9. Epub 2017/01/19. - PubMed
24. Degen RM, Camp CL, Bernard JA, Dines DM, Altchek DW, Dines JS. Current Trends in Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Surgery Among Newly Trained Orthopaedic Surgeons. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017 Feb;25(2):140-9. - PubMed
25. Shin JJ, Popchak AJ, Musahl V, Irrgang JJ, Lin A. Complications After Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Database. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2018 Dec 4;2(12):e093. - PubMed
26. Navarro RA, Gelber JD, Harrast JJ, Seiler JG 3rd, Jackson KR, Garcia IA. Frequency and complications after operative fixation of clavicular fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016 May;25(5):e125-9. Epub 2016 Feb 18. - PubMed
27. Salzler MJ, Lin A, Miller CD, Herold S, Irrgang JJ, Harner CD. Complications after arthroscopic knee surgery. Am J Sports Med. 2014 Feb;42(2):292-6. Epub 2013 Nov 27. - PubMed
28. Hippensteel KJ, Brophy R, Smith M, Wright R. Surgical Volume and Postoperative Complications of Acromioclavicular Joint Separations: Analysis of the ABOS Part II Examination. Am J Sports Med. 2018 Nov;46(13):3174-81. Epub 2018 Sep 20. - PubMed
29. Pour AE, Bradbury TL, Horst P, Harrast JJ, Erens GA, Roberson JR. Trends in primary and revision knee arthroplasty among orthopaedic surgeons who take the American Board of Orthopaedics part II exam. Int Orthop. 2016 Oct;40(10):2061-7. Epub 2016 Feb 22. - PubMed
30. Mann T, Baumhauer JF, O’Keefe RJ, Harrast J, Hurwitz SR, Voloshin I. High incidence of hemiarthroplasty for shoulder osteoarthritis among recently graduated orthopaedic surgeons. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 Nov;472(11):3510-6. Epub 2014 Aug 22. - PubMed
31. Wang D, Degen RM, Camp CL, McGraw MH, Altchek DW, Dines JS. Trends in Surgical Practices for Lateral Epicondylitis Among Newly Trained Orthopaedic Surgeons. Orthop J Sports Med. 2017 Oct 4;5(10):2325967117730570. - PubMed
32. Hinds RM, Capo JT, Rizzo M, Roberson JR, Gottschalk MB. Total Wrist Arthroplasty Versus Wrist Fusion: Utilization and Complication Rates as Reported by ABOS Part II Candidates. Hand (N Y). 2017 Jul;12(4):376-81. Epub 2016 Sep 12. - PubMed
33. Acevedo DC, Mann T, Abboud JA, Getz C, Baumhauer JF, Voloshin I. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures: patterns of use among newly trained orthopedic surgeons. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Sep;23(9):1363-7. Epub 2014 Apr 13. - PubMed
34. Anglen JO, Weinstein JN; American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Research Committee. Nail or plate fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures: changing pattern of practice. A review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Database. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Apr;90(4):700-7. - PubMed
35. Koval KJ, Harrast JJ, Anglen JO, Weinstein JN. Fractures of the distal part of the radius. The evolution of practice over time. Where’s the evidence? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Sep;90(9):1855-61. - PubMed
36. Degen RM, Camp CL, Werner BC, Dines DM, Dines JS. Trends in Bone-Block Augmentation Among Recently Trained Orthopaedic Surgeons Treating Anterior Shoulder Instability. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Jul 6;98(13):e56. - PubMed
37. Gottschalk MB, Carpenter W, Hiza E, Reisman W, Roberson J. Humeral Shaft Fracture Fixation: Incidence Rates and Complications as Reported by American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Candidates. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Sep 7;98(17):e71. - PubMed
38. Williams AA, Witten DM, Duester R, Chou LB. The benefits of implant removal from the foot and ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Jul 18;94(14):1316-20. - PubMed
39. Böstman O, Pihlajamäki H. Routine implant removal after fracture surgery: a potentially reducible consumer of hospital resources in trauma units. J Trauma. 1996 Nov;41(5):846-9. - PubMed
40. Jung HG, Kim JI, Park JY, Park JT, Eom JS, Lee DO. Is Hardware Removal Recommended after Ankle Fracture Repair? Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:5250672. Epub 2016 Oct 13. - PubMed
41. Rutkow IM. Orthopaedic operations in the United States, 1979 through 1983. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986 Jun;68(5):716-9. - PubMed
42. Brown BD, Steinert JN, Stelzer JW, Yoon RS, Langford JR, Koval KJ. Increased risk for complications following removal of hardware in patients with liver disease, pilon or pelvic fractures: A regression analysis. Injury. 2017 Dec;48(12):2705-8. Epub 2017 Oct 3. - PubMed
43. Brown RM, Wheelwright EF, Chalmers J. Removal of metal implants after fracture surgery—indications and complications. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1993 Apr;38(2):96-100. - PubMed
44. Gösling T, Hufner T, Hankemeier S, Zelle BA, Muller-Heine A, Krettek C. Femoral nail removal should be restricted in asymptomatic patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Jun;(423):222-6. - PubMed
45. Backes M, Schep NW, Luitse JS, Goslings JC, Schepers T. High Rates of Postoperative Wound Infection Following Elective Implant Removal. Open Orthop J. 2015 Aug 31;9:418-21. - PubMed
46. Vos DI, Verhofstad MH, Hanson B, van der Graaf Y, van der Werken C. Clinical outcome of implant removal after fracture healing. Design of a prospective multicentre clinical cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012 Aug 15;13:147. - PubMed

Publication Types

• Journal Article