The aim of this study was to determine the consensus best practice approach for the investigation and management of children (aged 0 to 15 years) in the UK with musculoskeletal infection (including septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, pyomyositis, tenosynovitis, fasciitis, and discitis). This consensus can then be used to ensure consistent, safe care for children in UK hospitals and those elsewhere with similar healthcare systems. A Delphi approach was used to determine consensus in three core aspects of care: 1) assessment, investigation, and diagnosis; 2) treatment; and 3) service, pathways, and networks. A steering group of paediatric orthopaedic surgeons created statements which were then evaluated through a two-round Delphi survey sent to all members of the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery (BSCOS). Statements were only included (‘consensus in’) in the final agreed consensus if at least 75% of respondents scored the statement as critical for inclusion. Statements were discarded (‘consensus out’) if at least 75% of respondents scored them as not important for inclusion. Reporting these results followed the Appraisal Guidelines for Research and Evaluation.Aims
Methods
Arthroscopic microfracture is a conventional form of treatment for patients with osteochondritis of the talus, involving an area of < 1.5 cm2. However, some patients have persistent pain and limitation of movement in the early postoperative period. No studies have investigated the combined treatment of microfracture and shortwave treatment in these patients. The aim of this prospective single-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was to compare the outcome in patients treated with arthroscopic microfracture combined with radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy (rESWT) and arthroscopic microfracture alone, in patients with ostechondritis of the talus. Patients were randomly enrolled into two groups. At three weeks postoperatively, the rESWT group was given shockwave treatment, once every other day, for five treatments. In the control group the head of the device which delivered the treatment had no energy output. The two groups were evaluated before surgery and at six weeks and three, six and 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale. Secondary outcome measures included a visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain and the area of bone marrow oedema of the talus as identified on sagittal fat suppression sequence MRI scans.Aims
Methods
A comprehensive classification for coronal lower limb alignment with predictive capabilities for knee balance would be beneficial in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This paper describes the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification and examines its utility in preoperative soft tissue balance prediction, comparing kinematic alignment (KA) to mechanical alignment (MA). A radiological analysis of 500 healthy and 500 osteoarthritic (OA) knees was used to assess the applicability of the CPAK classification. CPAK comprises nine phenotypes based on the arithmetic HKA (aHKA) that estimates constitutional limb alignment and joint line obliquity (JLO). Intraoperative balance was compared within each phenotype in a cohort of 138 computer-assisted TKAs randomized to KA or MA. Primary outcomes included descriptive analyses of healthy and OA groups per CPAK type, and comparison of balance at 10° of flexion within each type. Secondary outcomes assessed balance at 45° and 90° and bone recuts required to achieve final knee balance within each CPAK type.Aims
Methods
To determine the outcomes following revision surgery of metal-on-metal
hip arthroplasties (MoMHA) performed for adverse reactions to metal
debris (ARMD), and to identify factors predictive of re-revision. We performed a retrospective observational study using National
Joint Registry (NJR) data on 2535 MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery
for ARMD between 2008 and 2014. The outcomes studied following revision were
intra-operative complications, mortality and re-revision surgery.
Predictors of re-revision were identified using competing-risk regression
modelling.Aims
Patients and Methods
To compare the gait of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA)
and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients with healthy controls,
using a machine-learning approach. 145 participants (121 healthy controls, 12 patients with cruciate-retaining
TKA, and 12 with mobile-bearing medial UKA) were recruited. The
TKA and UKA patients were a minimum of 12 months post-operative,
and matched for pattern and severity of arthrosis, age, and body
mass index. Participants walked on an instrumented treadmill until their
maximum walking speed was reached. Temporospatial gait parameters,
and vertical ground reaction force data, were captured at each speed.
Oxford knee scores (OKS) were also collected. An ensemble of trees
algorithm was used to analyse the data: 27 gait variables were used
to train classification trees for each speed, with a binary output
prediction of whether these variables were derived from a UKA or
TKA patient. Healthy control gait data was then tested by the decision
trees at each speed and a final classification (UKA or TKA) reached
for each subject in a majority voting manner over all gait cycles
and speeds. Top walking speed was also recorded.Aims
Patients and Methods
There is a large amount of evidence available
about the relative merits of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty
(UKA and TKA). Based on the same evidence, different people draw
different conclusions and as a result, there is great variability
in the usage of UKA. The revision rate of UKA is much higher than TKA and so some
surgeons conclude that UKA should not be performed. Other surgeons
believe that the main reason for the high revision rate is that
UKA is easy to revise and, therefore, the threshold for revision
is low. They also believe that UKA has many advantages over TKA
such as a faster recovery, lower morbidity and mortality and better
function. They therefore conclude that UKA should be undertaken
whenever appropriate. The solution to this argument is to minimise the revision rate
of UKA, thereby addressing the main disadvantage of UKA. The evidence
suggests that this will be achieved if surgeons use UKA for at least
20% of their knee arthroplasties and use implants that are appropriate
for these broad indications. Cite this article:
