Peter F. Sharkey
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Peter F. Sharkey has a total of 12 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Javad Parvizi
Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital
3 shared publicationsAgnes M. Hewitt
1 shared publicationBenjamin Zmistowski
The Rothman Institute of Orthopaedics at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, 925 Chestnut Street, 5th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA
1 shared publicationCamilo Restrepo
1 shared publicationDavid L. Paskin
Thomas Jefferson University
1 shared publication- Justin D. Burkholder
Drexel University
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 1 January 2012
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Vol. 470 (1) , 138-143
Platelet-rich Plasma Does Not Reduce Blood Loss or Pain or Improve Range of Motion After TKA
Numerous reports suggest the application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) during TKA may decrease postoperative bleeding. Because excessive bleeding can increase postoperative pain and inflammation, use of PRP also reportedly decreases the need for narcotics and increases speed of recovery after TKA. Because previous investigations of PRP and TKA reflect a weak level of medical evidence, we sought to confirm these findings. We asked whether an intraoperative application of PRP gel to the deep wound reduced postoperative bleeding after TKA. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all 134 patients who received an intraoperative application of PRP during TKA from November 2009 to April 2010 and all 139 patients undergoing TKA who did not receive PRP between September 2009 to November 2009. Patients’ charts were reviewed to identify detailed data, including hemoglobin level, ROM, postoperative narcotic use, and length of hospital stay. Blood loss was determined by the hemoglobin drop on postoperative Day 2. The blood loss between study groups was similar (3.6 g/dL [study] versus 3.8 g/dL [controls]). Differences in passive ROM (88° versus 88°), narcotic requirement (27 versus 32 morphine equivalent), and length of stay (2.4 versus 2.6 days) were also similar. We found no clinically important differences in patients who received an intraoperative application of PRP compared with patients who did not receive PRP and therefore could not confirm the findings of previous studies. Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
- 1 January 2012
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Vol. 470 (1) , 138-143
Platelet-rich Plasma Does Not Reduce Blood Loss or Pain or Improve Range of Motion After TKA
Numerous reports suggest the application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) during TKA may decrease postoperative bleeding. Because excessive bleeding can increase postoperative pain and inflammation, use of PRP also reportedly decreases the need for narcotics and increases speed of recovery after TKA. Because previous investigations of PRP and TKA reflect a weak level of medical evidence, we sought to confirm these findings. We asked whether an intraoperative application of PRP gel to the deep wound reduced postoperative bleeding after TKA. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all 134 patients who received an intraoperative application of PRP during TKA from November 2009 to April 2010 and all 139 patients undergoing TKA who did not receive PRP between September 2009 to November 2009. Patients’ charts were reviewed to identify detailed data, including hemoglobin level, ROM, postoperative narcotic use, and length of hospital stay. Blood loss was determined by the hemoglobin drop on postoperative Day 2. The blood loss between study groups was similar (3.6 g/dL [study] versus 3.8 g/dL [controls]). Differences in passive ROM (88° versus 88°), narcotic requirement (27 versus 32 morphine equivalent), and length of stay (2.4 versus 2.6 days) were also similar. We found no clinically important differences in patients who received an intraoperative application of PRP compared with patients who did not receive PRP and therefore could not confirm the findings of previous studies. Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
- 1 January 2011
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Vol. 469 (1) , 138-145
Incidence and Reasons for Nonrevision Reoperation After Total Knee Arthroplasty
Reoperation after TKA. Methods Using our institutional joint arthroplasty database, we identified 10,188 TKA performed on 7,613 patients between April 2000 and March 2008. A nonrevision reoperation was defined as any procedure requiring anesthetic in which components with bony interfaces were not removed or exchanged. Procedures after revision TKA were excluded. Potential risk factors investigated included age, gender, laterality, and simultaneous bilateral versus staged bilateral versus unilateral TKA. The minimum followup was 1 year (median, 4.1 years; range, 1.1 to 9.1 years). Results Three hundred fifty-three patients of 7,613 (4.6%) underwent 434 nonrevision reoperations on 384 of 10,188 (3.8%) knees. The most common indication for nonrevision reoperation was stiffness (58%; 252 of 434), followed by patellar clunk (12%; 53), infection (12%; 52), wound revision (6%; 26), hematoma (4.4%; 19), among others. The median time to reoperation was 74.5 days (range, 1-3058 days) but varied widely. Younger patients and those with unilateral TKA were more likely to have a nonrevision reoperation. Conclusions The majority of nonrevision reoperations are performed for stiffness. Patellar clunk and infection also result in a large number of nonrevision reoperations. In weighing the future economic and workforce burden of TKA, nonrevision reoperations need to be acknowledged, and preventive measures need to be implemented. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence....
- 1 January 2011
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Vol. 469 (1) , 138-145
Incidence and Reasons for Nonrevision Reoperation After Total Knee Arthroplasty
Reoperation after TKA. Methods Using our institutional joint arthroplasty database, we identified 10,188 TKA performed on 7,613 patients between April 2000 and March 2008. A nonrevision reoperation was defined as any procedure requiring anesthetic in which components with bony interfaces were not removed or exchanged. Procedures after revision TKA were excluded. Potential risk factors investigated included age, gender, laterality, and simultaneous bilateral versus staged bilateral versus unilateral TKA. The minimum followup was 1 year (median, 4.1 years; range, 1.1 to 9.1 years). Results Three hundred fifty-three patients of 7,613 (4.6%) underwent 434 nonrevision reoperations on 384 of 10,188 (3.8%) knees. The most common indication for nonrevision reoperation was stiffness (58%; 252 of 434), followed by patellar clunk (12%; 53), infection (12%; 52), wound revision (6%; 26), hematoma (4.4%; 19), among others. The median time to reoperation was 74.5 days (range, 1-3058 days) but varied widely. Younger patients and those with unilateral TKA were more likely to have a nonrevision reoperation. Conclusions The majority of nonrevision reoperations are performed for stiffness. Patellar clunk and infection also result in a large number of nonrevision reoperations. In weighing the future economic and workforce burden of TKA, nonrevision reoperations need to be acknowledged, and preventive measures need to be implemented. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence....
- 1 September 2010
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Vol. 468 (9) , 2405-2409
Antiemesis After Total Joint Arthroplasty: Does a Single Preoperative Dose of Aprepitant Reduce Nausea and Vomiting?
An antiemetic developed for patients receiving chemotherapy, has a duration of action much longer than other antiemetics. Questions/purposes We asked whether a single dose of preoperative aprepitant (40 mg orally) reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting after THA or TKA. Methods Fifty patients who received a preoperative dose of aprepitant (study group) were matched demographically to 50 patients who did not receive aprepitant (control group) from a group of patients undergoing THA or TKA. Patients' charts were reviewed to identify episodes of PONV, number of doses of antiemetics needed for breakthrough PONV, and length of stay. Aprepitant side effects, and complications. Results Aprepitant reduced the percentage of patients with PONV (39% of study and 70% of control patients). Moderate or severe PONV occurred in 22% of study and 40% of control patients. The number of episodes of PONV during hospitalization was 2.9 for the control group and 1.6 for the study group. Postoperatively, the control group required on average 1.3 doses of ondansetron compared with 0.6 doses for the study group. Hospital length of stay was reduced from 3.3 days for the control group and to 2.3 days for the study group. Conclusions These data suggest a single preoperative dose of aprepitant reduces the number of episodes and severity of PONV, the need for additional antiemetics, and the length of stay. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study. See guidelines for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence....
- 1 September 2010
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Vol. 468 (9) , 2405-2409
Antiemesis After Total Joint Arthroplasty: Does a Single Preoperative Dose of Aprepitant Reduce Nausea and Vomiting?
An antiemetic developed for patients receiving chemotherapy, has a duration of action much longer than other antiemetics. Questions/purposes We asked whether a single dose of preoperative aprepitant (40 mg orally) reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting after THA or TKA. Methods Fifty patients who received a preoperative dose of aprepitant (study group) were matched demographically to 50 patients who did not receive aprepitant (control group) from a group of patients undergoing THA or TKA. Patients' charts were reviewed to identify episodes of PONV, number of doses of antiemetics needed for breakthrough PONV, and length of stay. Aprepitant side effects, and complications. Results Aprepitant reduced the percentage of patients with PONV (39% of study and 70% of control patients). Moderate or severe PONV occurred in 22% of study and 40% of control patients. The number of episodes of PONV during hospitalization was 2.9 for the control group and 1.6 for the study group. Postoperatively, the control group required on average 1.3 doses of ondansetron compared with 0.6 doses for the study group. Hospital length of stay was reduced from 3.3 days for the control group and to 2.3 days for the study group. Conclusions These data suggest a single preoperative dose of aprepitant reduces the number of episodes and severity of PONV, the need for additional antiemetics, and the length of stay. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study. See guidelines for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence....
- 30 June 2007
- Published by Elsevier in Seminars in Arthroplasty: JSES
- Vol. 18 (2) , 117-121
Diet, Nutrition, Obesity, and Their Roles in Arthritis
- 30 June 2007
- Published by Elsevier in Seminars in Arthroplasty: JSES
- Vol. 18 (2) , 117-121
Diet, Nutrition, Obesity, and Their Roles in Arthritis