Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 10 of 10
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 5 | Pages 830 - 839
1 May 2021
Ahmed I Chawla A Underwood M Price AJ Metcalfe A Hutchinson CE Warwick J Seers K Parsons H Wall PDH

Aims. 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. Methods. 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. Results. We included 41 RCTs with 2,819 participants. SAEs were significantly more common in the tourniquet group (53/901 vs 26/898, tourniquet vs no tourniquet respectively) (risk ratio 1.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10 to 2.73). The mean pain score on the first postoperative day was 1.25 points higher (95% CI 0.32 to 2.19) in the tourniquet group. Overall blood loss did not differ between groups (mean difference 8.61 ml; 95% CI -83.76 to 100.97). The mean length of hospital stay was 0.34 days longer in the group that had surgery with a tourniquet (95% CI 0.03 to 0.64) and the mean duration of surgery was 3.7 minutes shorter (95% CI -5.53 to -1.87). Conclusion. TKA with a tourniquet is associated with an increased risk of SAEs, pain, and a marginally longer hospital stay. The only finding in favour of tourniquet use was a shorter time in theatre. The results make it difficult to justify the routine use of a tourniquet in TKA surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):830–839


Objectives. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent used as a blood-sparing technique in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and is routinely administered by intravenous (IV) or intra-articular (IA) injection. Recently, a novel method of TXA administration, the combined IV and IA application of TXA, has been applied in TKA. However, the scientific evidence of combined administration of TXA in TKA is still meagre. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of combined IV and IA TXA in patients undergoing TKA. Materials and Methods. A systematic search was carried out in PubMed, the Cochrane Clinical Trial Register (Issue12 2015), Embase, Web of Science and the Chinese Biomedical Database. Only randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the efficacy and safety of combined use TXA in TKA were identified. Two authors independently identified the eligible studies, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3 software. Results. A total of ten RCTs (1143 patients) were included in this study. All the included studies were randomised and the quality of included studies still needed improvement. The results indicated that, compared with either placebo or the single-dose TXA (IV or IA) group, the combination of IV and IA TXA group had significantly less total blood loss, hidden blood loss, total drain output, a lower transfusion rate and a lower drop in haemoglobin level. There were no statistically significant differences in complications such as wound infection and deep vein thrombosis between the combination group and the placebo or single-dose TXA group. Conclusions. Compared with placebo or the single-dose TXA, the combined use of IV and IA TXA provided significantly better results with respect to all outcomes related to post-operative blood loss without increasing the risk of thromboembolic complications in TKA. Cite this article: Z. F. Yuan, H. Yin, W. P. Ma, D. L. Xing. The combined effect of administration of intravenous and topical tranexamic acid on blood loss and transfusion rate in total knee arthroplasty: combined tranexamic acid for TKA. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:353–361. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.58.BJR-2016-0001.R2


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 12 | Pages 948 - 956
15 Dec 2023
Vella-Baldacchino M Webb J Selvarajah B Chatha S Davies A Cobb JP Liddle AD

Aims

With up to 40% of patients having patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis (PFJ OA), the two arthroplasty options are to replace solely the patellofemoral joint via patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), or the entire knee via total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to assess postoperative success of second-generation PFAs compared to TKAs for patients treated for PFJ OA using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and domains deemed important by patients following a patient and public involvement meeting.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE via OVID, CINAHL, and EBSCO were searched from inception to January 2022. Any study addressing surgical treatment of primary patellofemoral joint OA using second generation PFA and TKA in patients aged above 18 years with follow-up data of 30 days were included. Studies relating to OA secondary to trauma were excluded. ROB-2 and ROBINS-I bias tools were used.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 11 | Pages 885 - 893
14 Nov 2022
Goshima K Sawaguchi T Horii T Shigemoto K Iwai S

Aims

To evaluate whether low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) accelerates bone healing at osteotomy sites and promotes functional recovery after open-wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO).

Methods

Overall, 90 patients who underwent OWHTO without bone grafting were enrolled in this nonrandomized retrospective study, and 45 patients treated with LIPUS were compared with 45 patients without LIPUS treatment in terms of bone healing and functional recovery postoperatively. Clinical evaluations, including the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, were performed preoperatively as well as six weeks and three, six, and 12 months postoperatively. The progression rate of gap filling was evaluated using anteroposterior radiographs at six weeks and three, six, and 12 months postoperatively.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 6 | Pages 397 - 404
1 Jun 2021
Begum FA Kayani B Magan AA Chang JS Haddad FS

Limb alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) influences periarticular soft-tissue tension, biomechanics through knee flexion, and implant survival. Despite this, there is no uniform consensus on the optimal alignment technique for TKA. Neutral mechanical alignment facilitates knee flexion and symmetrical component wear but forces the limb into an unnatural position that alters native knee kinematics through the arc of knee flexion. Kinematic alignment aims to restore native limb alignment, but the safe ranges with this technique remain uncertain and the effects of this alignment technique on component survivorship remain unknown. Anatomical alignment aims to restore predisease limb alignment and knee geometry, but existing studies using this technique are based on cadaveric specimens or clinical trials with limited follow-up times. Functional alignment aims to restore the native plane and obliquity of the joint by manipulating implant positioning while limiting soft tissue releases, but the results of high-quality studies with long-term outcomes are still awaited. The drawbacks of existing studies on alignment include the use of surgical techniques with limited accuracy and reproducibility of achieving the planned alignment, poor correlation of intraoperative data to long-term functional outcomes and implant survivorship, and a paucity of studies on the safe ranges of limb alignment. Further studies on alignment in TKA should use surgical adjuncts (e.g. robotic technology) to help execute the planned alignment with improved accuracy, include intraoperative assessments of knee biomechanics and periarticular soft-tissue tension, and correlate alignment to long-term functional outcomes and survivorship.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 1 | Pages 48 - 57
19 Jan 2021
Asokan A Plastow R Kayani B Radhakrishnan GT Magan AA Haddad FS

Cementless knee arthroplasty has seen a recent resurgence in popularity due to conceptual advantages, including improved osseointegration providing biological fixation, increased surgical efficiency, and reduced systemic complications associated with cement impaction and wear from cement debris. Increasingly younger and higher demand patients are requiring knee arthroplasty, and as such, there is optimism cementless fixation may improve implant survivorship and functional outcomes.

Compared to cemented implants, the National Joint Registry (NJR) currently reports higher revision rates in cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but lower in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, recent studies are beginning to show excellent outcomes with cementless implants, particularly with UKA which has shown superior performance to cemented varieties. Cementless TKA has yet to show long-term benefit, and currently performs equivalently to cemented in short- to medium-term cohort studies. However, with novel concepts including 3D-printed coatings, robotic-assisted surgery, radiostereometric analysis, and kinematic or functional knee alignment principles, it is hoped they may help improve the outcomes of cementless TKA in the long-term. In addition, though cementless implant costs remain higher due to novel implant coatings, it is speculated cost-effectiveness can be achieved through greater surgical efficiency and potential reduction in revision costs. There is paucity of level one data on long-term outcomes between fixation methods and the cost-effectiveness of modern cementless knee arthroplasty.

This review explores recent literature on cementless knee arthroplasty, with regards to clinical outcomes, implant survivorship, complications, and cost-effectiveness; providing a concise update to assist clinicians on implant choice.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(1):48–57.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 6 | Pages 1088 - 1095
1 Jun 2021
Banger M Doonan J Rowe P Jones B MacLean A Blyth MJB

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a bone-preserving treatment option for osteoarthritis localized to a single compartment in the knee. The success of the procedure is sensitive to patient selection and alignment errors. Robotic arm-assisted UKA provides technological assistance to intraoperative bony resection accuracy, which is thought to improve ligament balancing. This paper presents the five-year outcomes of a comparison between manual and robotically assisted UKAs.

Methods

The trial design was a prospective, randomized, parallel, single-centre study comparing surgical alignment in patients undergoing UKA for the treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis (ISRCTN77119437). Participants underwent surgery using either robotic arm-assisted surgery or conventional manual instrumentation. The primary outcome measure (surgical accuracy) has previously been reported, and, along with secondary outcomes, were collected at one-, two-, and five-year timepoints. Analysis of five-year results and longitudinal analysis for all timepoints was performed to compare the two groups.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 3 | Pages 191 - 197
1 Mar 2021
Kazarian GS Barrack RL Barrack TN Lawrie CM Nunley RM

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare the radiological outcomes of manual versus robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

Methods

Postoperative radiological outcomes from 86 consecutive robotic-assisted UKAs (RAUKA group) from a single academic centre were retrospectively reviewed and compared to 253 manual UKAs (MUKA group) drawn from a prior study at our institution. Femoral coronal and sagittal angles (FCA, FSA), tibial coronal and sagittal angles (TCA, TSA), and implant overhang were radiologically measured to identify outliers.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 7 | Pages 904 - 911
1 Jul 2017
Wall PDH Sprowson† AP Parsons NR Parsons H Achten J Balasubramanian S Thompson P Costa ML

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a femoral nerve block and a periarticular infiltration in the management of early post-operative pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Patients and Methods

A pragmatic, single centre, two arm parallel group, patient blinded, randomised controlled trial was undertaken. All patients due for TKA were eligible. Exclusion criteria included contraindications to the medications involved in the study and patients with a neurological abnormality of the lower limb. Patients received either a femoral nerve block with 75 mg of 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride around the nerve, or periarticular infiltration with 150 mg of 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride, 10 mg morphine sulphate, 30 mg ketorolac trometamol and 0.25 mg of adrenaline all diluted with 0.9% saline to make a volume of 150 ml.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 2 | Pages 194 - 200
1 Feb 2016
Tsukada S Wakui M Hoshino A

There is conflicting evidence about the benefit of using corticosteroid in periarticular injections for pain relief after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We carried out a double-blinded, randomised controlled trial to assess the efficacy of using corticosteroid in a periarticular injection to control pain after TKA.

A total of 77 patients, 67 women and ten men, with a mean age of 74 years (47 to 88) who were about to undergo unilateral TKA were randomly assigned to have a periarticular injection with or without corticosteroid. The primary outcome was post-operative pain at rest during the first 24 hours after surgery, measured every two hours using a visual analogue pain scale score. The cumulative pain score was quantified using the area under the curve.

The corticosteroid group had a significantly lower cumulative pain score than the no-corticosteroid group during the first 24 hours after surgery (mean area under the curve 139, 0 to 560, and 264, 0 to 1460; p = 0.024). The rate of complications, including surgical site infection, was not significantly different between the two groups up to one year post-operatively.

The addition of corticosteroid to the periarticular injection significantly decreased early post-operative pain. Further studies are needed to confirm the safety of corticosteroid in periarticular injection.

Take home message: The use of corticosteroid in periarticular injection offered better pain relief during the initial 24 hours after TKA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:194–200.