The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in young patients aged under 45 years with traumatic meniscal tears. We conducted a multicentre, open-labelled, randomized controlled trial in patients aged 18 to 45 years, with a recent onset, traumatic, MRI-verified, isolated meniscal tear without knee osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or standardized physical therapy with an optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy after three months of follow-up. We performed a cost-utility analysis on the randomization groups to compare both treatments over a 24-month follow-up period. Cost utility was calculated as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared to physical therapy. Calculations were performed from a healthcare system perspective and a societal perspective.Aims
Methods
Initial treatment of traumatic spinal cord injury remains as controversial in 2023 as it was in the early 19th century, when Sir Astley Cooper and Sir Charles Bell debated the merits or otherwise of surgery to relieve cord compression. There has been a lack of high-class evidence for early surgery, despite which expeditious intervention has become the surgical norm. This evidence deficit has been progressively addressed in the last decade and more modern statistical methods have been used to clarify some of the issues, which is demonstrated by the results of the SCI-POEM trial. However, there has never been a properly conducted trial of surgery versus active conservative care. As a result, it is still not known whether early surgery or active physiological management of the unstable injured spinal cord offers the better chance for recovery. Surgeons who care for patients with traumatic spinal cord injuries in the acute setting should be aware of the arguments on all sides of the debate, a summary of which this annotation presents. Cite this article:
Many surgeons choose to perform total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery with the aid of a tourniquet. A tourniquet is a device that fits around the leg and restricts blood flow to the limb. There is a need to understand whether tourniquets are safe, and if they benefit, or harm, patients. The aim of this study was to determine the benefits and harms of tourniquet use in TKA surgery. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, and trial registries up to 26 March 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing TKA with a tourniquet versus without a tourniquet. Outcomes included: pain, function, serious adverse events (SAEs), blood loss, implant stability, duration of surgery, and length of hospital stay.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to determine whether national standards of best practice are associated with improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in hip fracture patients. This was a multicentre cohort study conducted in 20 acute UK NHS hospitals treating hip fracture patients. Patients aged ≥ 60 years treated operatively for a hip fracture were eligible for inclusion. Regression models were fitted to each of the “Best Practice Tariff” indicators and overall attainment. The impact of attainment on HRQoL was assessed by quantifying improvement in EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) from estimated regression model coefficients.Aims
Methods
The number of arthroplasties being performed
increases each year. Patients undergoing an arthroplasty are at
risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and appropriate prophylaxis
has been recommended. However, the optimal protocol and the best
agent to minimise VTE under these circumstances are not known. Although
many agents may be used, there is a difference in their efficacy
and the risk of bleeding. Thus, the selection of a particular agent relies
on the balance between the desire to minimise VTE and the attempt
to reduce the risk of bleeding, with its undesirable, and occasionally
fatal, consequences. Acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) is an agent for VTE prophylaxis
following arthroplasty. Many studies have shown its efficacy in
minimising VTE under these circumstances. It is inexpensive and
well-tolerated, and its use does not require routine blood tests.
It is also a ‘milder’ agent and unlikely to result in haematoma
formation, which may increase both the risk of infection and the
need for further surgery. Aspirin is also unlikely to result in persistent
wound drainage, which has been shown to be associated with the use
of agents such as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and other
more aggressive agents. The main objective of this review was to summarise the current
evidence relating to the efficacy of aspirin as a VTE prophylaxis
following arthroplasty, and to address some of the common questions
about its use. There is convincing evidence that, taking all factors into account,
aspirin is an effective, inexpensive, and safe form of VTE following
arthroplasty in patients without a major risk factor for VTE, such
as previous VTE. Cite this article:
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:
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of
the most feared and challenging complications following total knee arthroplasty.
We provide a detailed description of our current understanding regarding
the management of PJI of the knee, including diagnostic aids,
pre-operative planning, surgical treatment, and outcome. Cite this article:
