Arthroscopy has become a routine surgical procedure, used as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool for the treatment of joint problems. This article discusses its origins and looks at how it is currently used

This paper aims to provide evidence-based guidance for the general orthopaedic surgeon faced with the presentation of a potential soft tissue sarcoma in an extremity.

Clinical studies evaluating the effects of vitamin D alone or in combination with calcium on physical function, falls and fractures have been inconsistent. Vitamin D has, however, been the focus of much orthopaedic, trauma and endocrine research. Playing a central role in muscle and bone metabolism, some studies on Vitamin D therapies offer the tantalising suggestion of a reduction in falls and fractures simply with vitamin D supplementation. We review the background and evidence behind vitamin D.

This article provides an overview of the role of genomics in sarcomas and describes how new methods of analysis and comparative screening have provided the potential to progress understanding and treatment of sarcoma. This article reviews genomic techniques, the evolution of the use of genomics in cancer, the current state of genomic analysis, and also provides an overview of the medical, social and economic implications of recent genomic advances.

According to a report by Millennium Research Group in January 2011, the US orthopaedic extremity device market will generate over $4.6 billion in revenue by 2015.¹ With an ageing demographic and increasing demand for better quality of life into old age, there is clearly a commercial drive for the orthopaedic device community to develop new and innovative solutions to bone and joint problems. Devising such solutions is one thing; protecting them, so that research investment can be rewarded, is another. How is such protection achieved? The judicious use of intellectual property rights plays a key role, and this article aims to provide some information about the use of patents to protect innovation.

The “Universal Protocol” (UP) was launched as a regulatory compliance standard by the Joint Commission on 1st July 1 2004, with the primary intent of reducing the occurrence of wrong-site and wrong-patient surgery. As we’re heading into the tenth year of the UP implementation in the United States, it is time for critical assessment of the protocol’s impact on patient safety related to the incidence of preventable never-events. This article opens the debate on the potential shortcomings and pitfalls of the UP, and provides recommendations on how to circumvent specific inherent vulnerabilities of this widely established patient safety protocol.

We live in troubled times. Increased opposition reliance on explosive devices, the widespread use of individual and vehicular body armour, and the improved survival of combat casualties have created many complex musculoskeletal injuries in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Explosive mechanisms of injury account for 75% of all musculoskeletal combat casualties. Throughout all the echelons of care medical staff practice consistent treatment strategies of damage control orthopaedics including tourniquets, antibiotics, external fixation, selective amputations and vacuum-assisted closure. Complications, particularly infection and heterotopic ossification, remain frequent, and re-operations are common. Meanwhile, non-combat musculoskeletal casualties are three times more frequent than those derived from combat and account for nearly 50% of all musculoskeletal casualties requiring evacuation from the combat zone.