Sclerosing encapsulated peritonitis secondary to abdominal tuberculosis complicated by spontaneous ileal perforation

The optimal timing of the second surgery in primary staged bilateral total hip/knee arthroplasty remains uncertain. Perioperative hospital adverse events represent a significant issue, even “minor events” lead to substantial costs in workup tests, interconsultations, and/or increased hospital length-of-stay (LOS). Therefore, we sought to ascertain whether the timing of the second arthroplasty affects perioperative outcomes and/or rates of adverse events.We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of 670 primary staged bilateral total hip/knee arthroplasty performed by 2 surgeons (2010-2016) at a single institution. The days between both arthroplasties were calculated for each pair of hips or knees. We evaluated demographics and LOS, discharge disposition, adverse events (ie, nausea, pulmonary embolism), and transfusion rates. The second arthroplasties (n = 335) were set apart in 2 groups based on the time they were done with respect to their corresponding contralateral first arthroplasty using 3 different thresholds: (1) ≤90 vs >90 days, (2) ≤180 vs >180 days, and (3) ≤365 vs >365 days.No significant differences in outcome comparisons were observed using either 90 or 180 days thresholds. However, using the 365 days thresholds, the mean LOS (2.21 vs 1.92 days, P = .015), adverse event (26% vs 15.3%, P = .021), total transfusion (7.4% vs 1.5%, P = .020), and allogeneic transfusion (6.9% vs 1.5%, P = .033) rates were significantly higher in second arthroplasties performed at or less than 1 year apart from the first, respectively.Staging the second arthroplasty more than a year apart from the first one seems to offer better LOS and rates of hospital adverse events, transfusions. However, unless patients are willing to wait a year between surgeries, our data also suggest no increased risk in regards to adverse events when proceeding before or after 90/180 days.Level III.