The Spine Adverse Events Severity System (SAVES) and Orthopaedic Surgical Adverse Events Severity System (OrthoSAVES) are standardised assessment tools designed to record adverse events (AEs) in orthopaedic patients. The primary objective was to compare AEs recorded prospectively by orthopaedic surgeons compared to trained independent clinical reviewers. The secondary objective was to compare AEs following spine, hip, knee, and shoulder orthopaedic procedures. Over a 10-week period, three orthopaedic spine surgeons recorded AEs following all elective procedures to the point of patient discharge. Three orthopaedic surgeons (hip, knee, and shoulder) also recorded AEs for their elective procedures. Two independent reviewers used SAVES and OrthoSAVES to record AEs after reviewing clinical notes by surgeons and other healthcare professionals (e.g. nurses, physiotherapists). At discharge, AEs recorded by the surgeons and independent reviewers were recorded in a database. AE data for 164 patients were collected (48 spine, 52 hip, 33 knee, and 31 shoulder). Overall, 98 AEs were captured by the independent reviewers, compared to 14 captured by the surgeons. Independent reviewers recorded significantly more AEs than surgeons overall, as well as for each individual group (i.e. spine, hip, knee, shoulder) (p2), but surgeons failed to record minor events that were captured by the independent reviewers (e.g. urinary retention and cutaneous injuries; AEs Grade 0.05). AEs were reported in 21 (43.8%), 19 (36.5%), 12 (36.4%), and five (16.1%) spine, hip, knee, and shoulder patients, respectively. Nearly all reported AEs required only simple or minor treatment (e.g. antibiotic, foley catheter) and had no effect on outcome. Two patients experienced AEs that required invasive or complex treatment (e.g. surgery, monitored bed) that had a temporary effect on outcome. Similar complication rates were reported in spine, hip, knee, and shoulder patients. Independent reviewers reported more AEs compared to surgeons. These findings suggest that independent reviewers are more effective at capturing AEs following orthopaedic surgery, and thus, could be recruited in order to capture more AEs, enhance patient safety and care, and maximise different complication diagnoses in alignment with proposed diagnosis-based funding models

Adverse events (AEs) following spine surgery are very common. It is important to monitor the incidence of AEs to ensure that appropriate practices are implemented to minimise AEs and improve patient outcomes. The Spine Adverse Events Severity System (SAVES) is a validated AE recording tool specifically designed for spine surgery and the Orthopaedic Surgical Adverse Events Severity System (OrthoSAVES) is a similar tool intended for general orthopaedic surgery. The main objective was to prospectively collect AE data from spine surgery patients using SAVES and OrthoSAVES and compare their viability and applicability for use. The longterm objective is to enhance patient safety by tracking AEs with a view towards potentially changing future healthcare practices to eliminate the risk factors for AEs. For a 10-week period in June-September 2015, three spine surgeons used SAVES to record AEs experienced by any elective spine surgery patients. In addition, a trained independent clinical reviewer with access to electronic records, medical charts, and allied health professionals (e.g. nurses, physioterhapists) used SAVES and OrthoSAVES to record AEs for the same patients. At discharge, the SAVES forms from the surgeons and SAVES and OrthoSAVES forms from the independent reviewer were collected and all AEs were recorded in a database. In 48 patients, the independent reviewer recorded a total of 45 AEs (4 intra-operative, 41 post-operative), compared to the surgeons who recorded a total of 8 AEs (2 intra-operative, 6 post-operative) (P2) were recorded by both the independent reviewer and surgeons. OrthoSAVES had the capacity to directly record 3 additional AEs that had to be included in the “Other” section on SAVES. SAVES and OrthoSAVES are valuable tools for recording AEs. Use of SAVES and OrthoSAVES has the potential to enhance patient care and safety by ensuring AEs are followed by the surgeon during their in-hospital stay and prior to discharge. Independent reviewers are more effective at capturing AEs following spine surgery, and thus, could be recruited in order to capture more AEs and maximise different complication diagnoses in alignment with proposed diagnosis-based funding models. The next step is to analyse AE data identified by the hospital discharge abstract to determine whether retrospective administrative coding can adequately record AEs compared to prospectively-collected AE data with SAVES/OrthoSAVES

Aims. This study aimed to investigate the risk of postoperative complications in COVID-19-positive patients undergoing common orthopaedic procedures. Methods. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme (NSQIP) database, patients who underwent common orthopaedic surgery procedures from 1 January to 31 December 2021 were extracted. Patient preoperative COVID-19 status, demographics, comorbidities, type of surgery, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Propensity score matching was conducted between COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. Multivariable regression was then performed to identify both patient and provider risk factors independently associated with the occurrence of 30-day postoperative adverse events. Results. Of 194,121 included patients, 740 (0.38%) were identified to be COVID-19-positive. Comparison of comorbidities demonstrated that COVID-19-positive patients had higher rates of diabetes, heart failure, and pulmonary disease. After propensity matching and controlling for all preoperative variables, multivariable analysis found that COVID-19-positive patients were at increased risk of several postoperative complications, including: any adverse event, major adverse event, minor adverse event, death, venous thromboembolism, and pneumonia. COVID-19-positive patients undergoing hip/knee arthroplasty and trauma surgery were at increased risk of 30-day adverse events. Conclusion. COVID-19-positive patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery had increased odds of many 30-day postoperative complications, with hip/knee arthroplasty and trauma surgery being the most high-risk procedures. These data reinforce prior literature demonstrating increased risk of venous thromboembolic events in the acute postoperative period. Clinicians caring for patients undergoing orthopaedic procedures should be mindful of these increased risks, and attempt to improve patient care during the ongoing global pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):704–712

In the Unites States, approximately 24% of people undergoing primary total knee or total hip arthroplasty (TKA, THA) are chronic opioid users pre-operatively. Few studies have examined the incidence of opioid use prior to TKA/THA and whether it predicts outcomes post-surgery in the Australian context. The aim was to determine: (i) the proportion of TKA and THA patients who use opioids regularly (daily) pre-surgery; (ii) if opioid use pre-surgery predicts (a) complication and readmission rates to 6-months post-surgery, (b) patient-reported outcomes to 6-months post-surgery. A retrospective cohort study was undertaken utilising linked individual patient-level data from two independent databases comprising approximately 3500 people. Patients had surgery between January 2013 and June 2018, inclusive at Fairfield and Bowral Hospitals. Following data linkage, analysis was completed on 1185 study participants (64% female, 69% TKA, mean age 67 (9.9)). 30% were using regular opioids pre-operatively. Unadjusted analyses resulted in the following rates in those who . were. vs . were not. using opioids pre-operatively (respectively); acute adverse events (39.1% vs 38.6%), acute significant adverse events (5.3% vs 5.7%), late adverse events: (6.9% vs 6.6%), total significant adverse events: (12.5% vs 12.4%), discharge to inpatient rehab (86.4% vs 88.6%), length of hospital stay (5.9 (3.0) vs 5.6 (3.0) days), 6-month post-op Oxford Score (38.8 (8.9) vs 39.5 (7.9)), 6 months post-op EQ-VAS (71.7 (20.2) vs 76.7 (18.2), p<0.001), success post-op described as “much better” (80.2% vs 81.3%). Adjusted regression analyses controlling for multiple co-variates indicated no significant association between pre-op opioid use and adverse events/patient-reported outcomes. Pre-operative opioid use was high amongst this Australian arthroplasty cohort and was not associated with increased risk of adverse events post-operatively. Further research is needed in assessing the relationship between the amount of pre-op opioid use and the risk of post-operative adverse events

Introduction. Circular frames for ankle fusion are usually reserved for complex clinical scenarios. Current literature is heterogenous and difficult to interpret. We aimed to study the indications and outcomes of this procedure in detail. Materials & Methods. A retrospective cohort study was performed based on a prospective database of frame surgeries performed in a tertiary institution. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing complex ankle fusion with circular frames between 2005 and 2020, with a minimum 12-month follow up. Data were collected on patient demographics, surgical indications, comorbidities, surgical procedures, external fixator time (EFT), length of stay (LOS), radiological and clinical outcomes, and adverse events. Factors influencing radiological and clinical outcomes were analysed. Results. 47 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of three years. The mean age at time of surgery was 63.6 years. Patients had a median of two previous surgeries. The median LOS was 8.5 days, and median EFT was 237 days. Where simultaneous limb lengthening was performed, the average lengthening was 2.9cm, increasing the EFT by an average of 4 months. Primary and final union rates were 91.5% and 95.7% respectively. At last follow-up, ASAMI bone scores were excellent or good in 87.2%. ASAMI functional scores were good in 79.1%. Patient satisfaction was 83.7%. 97.7% of patients experienced adverse events, most commonly pin-site related, with major complications in 30.2% and re-operations in 60.5%. There were 3 amputations. Adverse events were associated with increased age, poor soft tissue condition, severe deformities, subtalar fusions, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, and prolonged EFT. Conclusions. Complex ankle fusion using circular frames can achieve good outcomes in complicated clinical scenarios, however patients can expect a prolonged time in the frame and high rates of adverse events. Multiple risk factors were identified for poorer outcomes, which should be considered in patient counselling and prognostication

Introduction. Osseointegration has been established as a promising approach for the reconstruction of amputated limbs, particularly for amputees suffering from traditional socket prosthesis (TSP). While Osseointegration was originally developed with a screw fixation design, several Osseointegration devices adopting a modern press-fit design have also been introduced. In this study, medium-term outcomes for patients with the two most common press-fit osseointegration implant used worldwide are analysed. Materials and Methods. This is a cross-sectional analysis containing a cohort of Osseointegration patients treated in several centres worldwide. We analyzed a total of 93 patients with an average follow-up time of 6.52 years. Functional, Mobility and patient reported outcomes were collected pre-operatively and during follow-up. All postoperative adverse events (infection, revision surgery, fractures, and implant failures) were also analyzed. Results. Crude analysis of the data indicated that all 93 patients continue to use their osseointegrated prosthesis. Significant improvements for all outcome measures were observed. However, several adverse events including 19 implant revisions, 8 periprosthetic fractures and 43 surgical debridements were also reported. A detailed analysis was performed on each adverse event type to evaluate possible causes. Conclusions. At 5 years post-surgery, Osseointegration continues to provide amputees with improvements on function and quality of life which were previously unattainable with socket prosthesis. However, the benefits are accompanied with a relatively high risk of adverse events. Further research in standardizing clinical practice and the development of better implant may offer a reduction to these risks

Aim. Tedizolid is an oxazolidinone antibiotic that: (i) is recommended at the dose of 200 once daily in patients with skin and soft tissue infection; (ii) seems to have a better long-term hematological and neurological safety profile in comparison with linezolid; (iii) remains active on multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-positive pathogens. Consequently, it might represent an option as suppressive antimicrobial treatment (SAT) in patients with complex implant-associated bone and joint infection (BJI) due to MDR Gram-positive pathogens. Method. We performed a cohort study (2017–2020) to evaluate the long-term safety of tedizolid (200mg qd) as SAT in patients with implant-associated BJI. In all cases, the use of tedizolid was validated as the last oral treatment option during multidisciplinar meetings in a reference center for the management of BJI. Serious adverse events, any reason for discontinuation, and standard biological data, were prospectively collected. Results. Seventeen patients (13 males; median age 73 years) received tedizolid as SAT for late complex prosthetic-joint infections (n=16) or osteosynthesis (n=1). Pathogens were MDR coagulase negative staphylococci (16 patients), Corynebacterium striatrum (2 patients), Enterococcus faecium (1 patient) and/or S. aureus (1 patient). Tedizolid was always started after a primary treatment (median duration of intravenous 47 days; followed by linezolid in 12 patients including 9 who experienced linezolid-induced serious adverse event) that followed a surgery, mainly debridement and implant retention (13 patients). Median duration of tedizolid was 6 months (min, 1 month; max, 31 months). The only reason for discontinuation was a failure of the conservative strategy that occurred in four patients (17%) during the follow-up. No patients developed a serious adverse event, or a discontinuation of tedizolid due to an adverse event. Anemia was observed in two patients, who had already other known cause of anemia (chronic leukemia and oesophageal varices); stable thrombopenia was observed in a cirrhotic patient (80 G/L, stable during the treatment course of 12 months); and a transient mild neutropenia (1.4 G/L) was observed in another patient (Figure). No neurological adverse event was observed. Conclusions. Tedizolid seems to be a safe option as SAT in patients with complex implantassociated BJI due MDR Gram-positive pathogens. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. This study reports on minimum 2 year follow up outcomes on functional and quality of life of patients after undergoing bilateral osseointegration in comparison to traditional socket prosthesis. Materials & Methods. This is a prospective pilot study of 35 patients, consisting of 30 males and 5 females, aged 22–66 (mean 36) years at surgery, with minimum two-year follow-up. Selection criteria were age over 18 years, bilateral amputees who had socket-related problems or were wheelchair-bound with short stumps and non-reconstructable limb pathology. Principle outcome measures included the Questionnaire for persons with a Trans-Femoral Amputation (Q-TFA), Short Form Health Survey 36 (SF-36), Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT), Timed Up and Go (TUG), and K-levels. Adverse events were recorded including infection, revision surgery, fractures, and implant failures. Results. Comparisons were made using differences between the mean pre-operative and mean post-operative values for each outcome measure. Significant improvements in all validated outcome measures were observed. All patient who were wheelchair bound prior to the surgery were able to mobilise post operatively. The occurrence levels of adverse events, including the infection rate and revision rate within this patient cohort, were similar to other established trans-femoral osseointegration studies. Conclusions. These preliminary results indicate that osseointegration surgery is a safe and effective alternative treatment for bilateral amputees experiencing socket-related discomfort. Compared to the suboptimal outcomes of socket prostheses, osseointegration currently provides one of the best chances for any bilateral amputee to walk again and regain the ability to perform daily activities

Aim. Fungal orthopaedic infections most commonly affect people with complex surgical histories and existing comorbidities. Recurrence and re-infection rates are high, even with optimal surgical and systemic antifungal treatment. AmBisome liposomal amphotericin B has been suggested for local antifungal therapy, as an adjunctive treatment for fungal osteoarticular infections. Few case series have examined its clinical use when combined with polymethylmethacrylate cement PMMA), or with absorbable local antibiotic carriers. We aimed to evaluate the clinical use of local antifungal therapy with AmBisome liposomal amphotericin B (ABlaB), including tolerated doses, serious adverse events, and treatment outcomes. Method. A retrospective cohort of all patients treated with local antifungal therapy with ABlaB between January 2016 and January 2021 in a specialist orthopaedic hospital was identified using pharmacy records. Renal function, serious adverse events during treatment, surgical outcomes including spacer fracture and infection recurrence, were identified from electronic clinical records. The project was approved by the Institutional Review Board (clinical audit 6871). Results. 13 operations involving local antifungal therapy with ABlaB, in 12 patients, were identified. Eleven were infected with Candida species and one with Aspergillus. Mean follow-up was 22 months (range 4–46). Ten first stage arthroplasty revisions, 2 second stage arthroplasty revisions, and one debridement and removal of metalwork for fracture-related infection were performed. Locally implanted doses of ABlaB ranged from 100mg to 3600mg (50–400mg per 40g mix of PMMA). Six patients received ABlaB in absorbable antibiotic carriers containing calcium sulphate. This was noted to delay carrier setting. Patients were also given systemic antifungal therapy. No patients experienced serious adverse events related to toxicity from local antifungal therapy with ABlaB. There were no spacer fractures. Overall treatment success was 54% at final follow-up, although there were no recurrent fungal infections identified in patients experiencing treatment failure. Conclusions. Local antifungal therapy with liposomal amphotericin B, when combined with surgery and systemic therapy, appears to be a safe and well tolerated intervention in the management of complex fungal osteoarticular infections

Classification systems for the reporting of surgical complications have been developed and adapted for many surgical subspecialties. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the variability and frequency of reporting terms used to describe complications in ankle fracture fixation. We hypothesized that the terminology used would be highly variable and inconsistent, corroborating previous results that have suggested a need for standardized reporting terminology in orthopaedics. Ankle fracture outcome studies meeting predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for analysis by two independent observers. Terms used to define adverse events were identified and recorded. If a difference occurred between the two observers, a third observer was enlisted. Results of both observers were compared. All terms were then compiled and assessed for variability and frequency of use throughout the studies involved. Reporting terminology was subsequently grouped into 10 categories. In the 48 studies analyzed, 301 unique terms were utilized to describe adverse events. Of these terms, 74.4% (224/301) were found in a single study each. Only one term, “infection”, was present in 50% of studies, and only 19 of 301 terms (6.3%) were used in at least 10% of papers. The category that was most frequently reported was infection, with 89.6% of studies reporting on this type of adverse event using 25 distinct terms. Other categories were “wound healing complications” (72.9% of papers, 38 terms), “bone/joint complications” (66.7% of papers, 35 terms), “hardware/implant complications” (56.3% of papers, 47 terms), “revision” (56.3% of papers, 35 terms), “cartilage/soft tissue injuries” (45.8% of papers, 31 terms), “reduction/alignment issues” (45.8% of papers, 29 terms),“medical complications” (43.8% of papers, 32 terms), “pain” (29.2% of papers, 16 terms) and “other complications” (20.8% of papers, 13 terms). There was a 78.6% interobserver agreement in the identification of adverse terms across the 48 studies included. The reporting terminology utilized to describe adverse events in ankle fracture fixation was found to be highly variable and inconsistent. This variability prevents accurate reporting of adverse events and makes the analysis of potential outcomes difficult. The development of standardized reporting terminology in orthopaedics would be instrumental in addressing these challenges and allow for more accurate and consistent outcomes reporting

In multilevel posterior cervical instrumented fusions, extending the fusion across the cervico-thoracic junction at T1 or T2 (CTJ) has been associated with decreased rate of re-operation and pseudarthrosis but with longer surgical time and increased blood loss. The impact on patient reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective was to determine whether extending the fusion through the CTJ influenced PROs at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Secondary objectives were to compare the number of patients reaching the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for the PROs and mJOA, operative time duration, intra-operative blood loss (IOBL), length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, adverse events (AEs), re-operation within 12 months of the surgery, and patient satisfaction. This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a multicenter observational cohort study of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Patients who underwent a posterior instrumented fusion of 4 levels of greater (between C2-T2) between January 2015 and October 2020 with 12 months follow-up were included. PROS (NDI, EQ5D, SF-12 PCS and MCS, NRS arm and neck pain) and mJOA were compared using ANCOVA, adjusted for baseline differences. Patient demographics, comorbidities and surgical details were abstracted. Percentafe of patient reaching MCID for these outcomes was compared using chi-square test. Operative duration, IOBL, AEs, re-operation, discharge disposittion, LOS and satisfaction were compared using chi-square test for categorical variables and independent samples t-tests for continuous variables. A total of 206 patients were included in this study (105 patients not crossing the CTJ and 101 crossing the CTJ). Patients who underwent a construct extending through the CTJ were more likely to be female and had worse baseline EQ5D and NDI scores (p> 0.05). When adjusted for baseline difference, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups for the PROs and mJOA at 3 and 12 months. Surgical duration was longer (p 0.05). Satisfaction with the surgery was high in both groups but significantly different at 12 months (80% versus 72%, p= 0.042 for the group not crossing the CTJ and the group crossing the CTJ, respectively). The percentage of patients reaching MCID for the NDI score was 55% in the non-crossing group versus 69% in the group extending through the CTJ (p= 0.06). Up to 12 months after the surgery, there was no statistically significant differences in PROs between posterior construct extended to or not extended to the upper thoracic spine. The adverse event profile did not differ significantly, but longer surgical time and blood loss were associated with construct extending across the CTJ

Aims. Safety concerns surrounding osseointegration are a significant barrier to replacing socket prosthesis as the standard of care following limb amputation. While implanted osseointegrated prostheses traditionally occur in two stages, a one-stage approach has emerged. Currently, there is no existing comparison of the outcomes of these different approaches. To address safety concerns, this study sought to determine whether a one-stage osseointegration procedure is associated with fewer adverse events than the two-staged approach. Methods. A comprehensive electronic search and quantitative data analysis from eligible studies were performed. Inclusion criteria were adults with a limb amputation managed with a one- or two-stage osseointegration procedure with follow-up reporting of complications. Results. A total of 19 studies were included: four one-stage, 14 two-stage, and one article with both one- and two-stage groups. Superficial infection was the most common complication (one-stage: 38% vs two-stage: 52%). There was a notable difference in the incidence of osteomyelitis (one-stage: nil vs two-stage: 10%) and implant failure (one-stage: 1% vs two-stage: 9%). Fracture incidence was equivocal (one-stage: 13% vs two-stage: 12%), and comparison of soft-tissue, stoma, and mechanical related complications was not possible. Conclusion. This review suggests that the one-stage approach is favourable compared to the two-stage, because the incidence of complications was slightly lower in the one-stage cohort, with a pertinent difference in the incidence of osteomyelitis and implant failure. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(7):539–550

Adequate visual clarity is paramount to performing arthroscopic shoulder surgery safely, efficiently, and effectively. The addition of epinephrine in irrigation fluid, and the intravenous or local administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) have independently been reported to decrease bleeding thereby improving the surgeon's visualization during arthroscopic shoulder procedures. No study has compared the effect of systemic administered TXA, epinephrine added in the irrigation fluid or the combination of both TXA and epinephrine on visual clarity during shoulder arthroscopy with a placebo group. The purpose of this study is to determine if intravenous TXA is a safe alternative to epinephrine delivered by a pressure-controlled pump in improving arthroscopic shoulder visualization during arthroscopic procedures and whether using both TXA and epinephrine together has an additive effect in improving visualization. The design of the study was a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial with four 1:1:1:1 parallel groups conducted at one center. Patients aged ≥18 years undergoing arthroscopic shoulder procedures including rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic biceps tenotomy/tenodesis, distal clavicle excision, subacromial decompression and labral repair by five fellowship-trained upper extremity surgeons were randomized into one of four arms: Pressure pump-controlled regular saline irrigation fluid (control), epinephrine (1ml of 1:1000) mixed in irrigation fluid (EPI), 1g intravenous TXA (TXA), and epinephrine and TXA (EPI/TXA). Visualization was rated on a 4-point Likert scale every 15 minutes with 0 indicating ‘poor’ quality and 3 indicating ‘excellent’ quality. The primary outcome measure was the unweighted mean of these ratings. Secondary outcomes included mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), surgery duration, surgery complexity, and adverse events within the first postoperative week. One hundred and twenty-eight participants with a mean age (± SD) of 56 (± 11) years were randomized. Mean visualization quality for the control, TXA, EPI, and EPI/TXA groups were 2.1 (±0.40), 2.1 (±0.52), 2.6 (±0.37), 2.6 (±0.35), respectively. In a regression model with visual quality as the dependent variable, the presence/absence of EPI was the most significant predictor of visualization quality (R=0.525; p < 0 .001). TXA presence/absence had no effect, and there was no interaction between TXA and EPI. The addition of MAP and surgery duration strengthened the model (R=0.529; p < 0 .001). Increased MAP and surgery duration were both associated with decreased visualization quality. When surgery duration was controlled, surgery complexity was not a significant predictor of visualization quality. No adverse events were recorded in any of the groups. Intravenous administration of TXA is not an effective alternative to epinephrine in the irrigation fluid to improve visualization during routine arthroscopic shoulder surgeries although its application is safe. There is no additional improvement in visualization when TXA is used in combination with epinephrine beyond the effect of epinephrine alone

Adequate visual clarity is paramount to performing arthroscopic shoulder surgery safely, efficiently, and effectively. The addition of epinephrine in irrigation fluid, and the intravenous or local administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) have independently been reported to decrease bleeding thereby improving the surgeon's visualization during arthroscopic shoulder procedures. No study has compared the effect of systemic administered TXA, epinephrine added in the irrigation fluid or the combination of both TXA and epinephrine on visual clarity during shoulder arthroscopy with a placebo group. The purpose of this study is to determine if intravenous TXA is a safe alternative to epinephrine delivered by a pressure-controlled pump in improving arthroscopic shoulder visualization during arthroscopic procedures and whether using both TXA and epinephrine together has an additive effect in improving visualization. The design of the study was a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial with four 1:1:1:1 parallel groups conducted at one center. Patients aged ≥18 years undergoing arthroscopic shoulder procedures including rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic biceps tenotomy/tenodesis, distal clavicle excision, subacromial decompression and labral repair by five fellowship-trained upper extremity surgeons were randomized into one of four arms: Pressure pump-controlled regular saline irrigation fluid (control), epinephrine (1ml of 1:1000) mixed in irrigation fluid (EPI), 1g intravenous TXA (TXA), and epinephrine and TXA (EPI/TXA). Visualization was rated on a 4-point Likert scale every 15 minutes with 0 indicating ‘poor’ quality and 3 indicating ‘excellent’ quality. The primary outcome measure was the unweighted mean of these ratings. Secondary outcomes included mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), surgery duration, surgery complexity, and adverse events within the first postoperative week. One hundred and twenty-eight participants with a mean age (± SD) of 56 (± 11) years were randomized. Mean visualization quality for the control, TXA, EPI, and EPI/TXA groups were 2.1 (±0.40), 2.1 (±0.52), 2.6 (±0.37), 2.6 (±0.35), respectively. In a regression model with visual quality as the dependent variable, the presence/absence of EPI was the most significant predictor of visualization quality (R=0.525; p < 0 .001). TXA presence/absence had no effect, and there was no interaction between TXA and EPI. The addition of MAP and surgery duration strengthened the model (R=0.529; p < 0 .001). Increased MAP and surgery duration were both associated with decreased visualization quality. When surgery duration was controlled, surgery complexity was not a significant predictor of visualization quality. No adverse events were recorded in any of the groups. Intravenous administration of TXA is not an effective alternative to epinephrine in the irrigation fluid to improve visualization during routine arthroscopic shoulder surgeries although its application is safe. There is no additional improvement in visualization when TXA is used in combination with epinephrine beyond the effect of epinephrine alone

Tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a subject of considerable debate. A recent study questioned the need for tourniquets based on associated risks. However, the study omitted analysis of crucial tourniquet-related parameters which have been demonstrated in numerous studies to be associated with safe tourniquet use and reduction of adverse events. The current utilization and preferences of tourniquet use in Canada remain unknown. Our primary aim was to determine the current practices, patterns of use, and opinions of tourniquet use in TKA among members of the Canadian Arthroplasty Society (CAS). Additionally, we sought to determine the need for updated best practice guidelines to inform optimal tourniquet use and to identify areas requiring further research. A self-administered survey was emailed to members of the CAS in October 2021(six-week period). The response rate was 57% (91/161). Skip logic branching was used to administer a maximum of 59 questions related to tourniquet use, beliefs, and practices. All respondents were staff surgeons and 88% were arthroplasty fellowship trained. Sixty-five percent have been in practice for ≥11 years and only 16% for 50 TKA/year, 59% have an academic practice, and >67% prefer cemented TKA. Sixty-six percent currently use tourniquets, 25% no longer do but previously did, and 9% never used tourniquets. For those not using tourniquets, the most common reasons are potential harm/risks and publications/conferences. Among current users, 48% use in all cases and an additional 37% use in 76-99% of cases. The top reason for use was improved visualization/bloodless field (88%), followed by performing a cemented TKA, used in training, and faster operative times. The main patient factor influencing selective tourniquet use was peripheral vascular disease and main surgical factors were operative duration and cementless TKA. The most frequent adverse events reported were bruising/pinching under the tourniquet and short-term pain, which majority believed were related to improper tourniquet use (prolonged time, high-pressures, poor cuff fit), yet only 8% use contoured tourniquets and 32% don't use limb protection. Despite substantial evidence in literature that tourniquet safety and probability of harm are affected by tourniquet time and pressure, only 83% and 72% of respondents believe reducing tourniquet time and pressure respectively reduce the probability of harm. In addition, no surgeon utilizes personalized limb occlusion pressure which has been demonstrated to substantially reduce tourniquet pressure while being safe and effective. Furthermore, 62% always use fixed pressure and 37% will modify the pressure based on patient parameters, most often systolic blood pressure and limb size. Almost all (88%) were interested in new evidence-based guidelines regarding these parameters. Tourniquet use in TKA remains prevalent among arthroplasty surgeons in the CAS; however tremendous practice variability regarding several key parameters required for optimal use exists. Current best practices of tourniquet use regarding personalized pressures, time, and type are not being utilized across Canada. There is considerable interest and need for further research and updated guidelines regarding key parameters of safe tourniquet usage to optimize tourniquet use in TKA

Background. Over 35% of surgeons in the United States, and 10% in Canada use the direct anterior approach for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Some of the key barriers in its wider adoption are the learning curve and associated increased risk of adverse events. The purpose of this study was to determine the adoption rate as well as 90-day re-admission and adverse event of the anterior approach in a community-based hospital. Methods. From December 2015 to August 2018, two laterally based approach senior orthopaedic surgeons with over 20 years of practice performed 319 primary total hip replacements, with 164 being done through the anterior approach and 155 through the lateral approach. All but 8 of the anterior approaches were done on a regular operating table. Results. The anterior and lateral approach groups were comparable in age with mean 69.1+/− 10.2 and 68.9+/−9.3, respectively (p= 0.886), however the anterior group had patients with a statistically significantly lower BMI than the lateral group with mean 28.2+/−5.4 and 31.0+/−6.3, respectively (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a much lower percentage of females in the anterior group than in the lateral group with 49.4% and 65.2%, respectively (p= 0.004). It took surgeon A and B 12 and 24 months for the anterior approach to represent over 50% of their monthly cases, respectively. The anterior approach now accounts for approximately 80% of surgeon A's practice and 100% in surgeon B's practice in the last 6 and 18 months, respectively. Intraoperative adverse events were comparable between anterior and lateral approaches, with one incidence in each group (p= 0.968), however post-operative adverse events were more prevalent in the lateral group (n= 24) when compared to anterior group (n= 11) (p= 0.012). Further details of both approaches are provided in figure 1. Conclusion. Within a well-structured environment, the anterior approach can be safely introduced into a community-based practice. The progressive adoption of a new surgical technique combined with more experienced surgeon as a resource is an effective way that requires further study. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

To evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes of patients treated arthroscopically with chitin-based scaffolding for acetabular chondral defects in conjunction with microfracture compared to microfracture alone. This study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. A review of charts was performed (2014–2016) on all patients who underwent hip arthroscopy and had microfracture +/− scaffolding for acetabular chondral defects, intraoperative details (lesion size, grade, labral repair/reconstruction) and postoperative complications were recorded with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Clinical outcomes were assessed by analysing iHOT and HOS scores which were obtained pre-operatively, at six months, one year and two years post-surgery. Plain radiographs were assessed for hip osteoarthritis by Kellgren & Lawrence grading. A total of 60 patients (microfracture=25, scaffolding=35) were included. Patients had a mean age of 36.2 years at the time of the index operation. There were no major adverse events of deep vein 36.2 years at the time of the index operation. There were no major adverse events of deep vein thrombosis, blood vessel or nerve damage, hemarthrosis or device related adverse events in both groups. Two patients were readmitted due to pain as a result of an inflammatory reaction in the scaffolding group. Both treatments of microfracture and scaffolding showed significant improvement in outcome score (iHOT) (p < 0 .001) when compared postoperative to preoperative. Both the arthroscopic treatment of chondral acetabular defects with chitin based scaffolding and microfracture demonstrated significant improvement from their pre-operative outcomes

Aim. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of treatment regimens in a pathogen and surgery specific mode according to a standardized algorithm for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) based on combinations with 15g/d intravenous fosfomycin followed by oral antibiotics for totally 12 weeks. Method. Consecutive patients with PJI caused by at least one of the following isolates were prospectively included: staphylococci (MIC ≤32 mg/l), streptococci (MIC ≤128 mg/l), enterococci (MIC ≤128 mg/l), Enterobacteriaceae (MIC ≤32 mg/l) and Pseudomonas spp. (MIC ≤128 mg/l). PJI was defined by the proposed European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) criteria. Follow up with clinical (joint function and quality of life scores), laboratory and radiological evaluation at 3, 12 and 24 months after last surgery is performed. Infection outcome was assessed as the proportion of infection-free patients. The probability of infection-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier survival method. Results. 50 patients were screened for eligibility, of which 2 were excluded due to intolerance or allergy to fosfomycin, 1 due to isolation of fosfomycin resistant pathogen and 2 patients died due to unrelated cause to infection. The remaining 45 patients were included. Due to persistence of infection, 3 patients underwent prosthesis explantation after initial debridement and retention, 1 patient underwent debridement of Girdlestone-situation; all 4 infections were caused by S. aureus. At 2 patients debridement of hematoma after Girdlestone approach was performed. 41 patients were infection-free (91%) after a median follow-up of 6 month (range, 1 – 14 months). Nausea (n=14) and hypokalemia (n=13) were the most frequent adverse events and resolved after fosfomycin discontinuation; 5 patients had diarrhea and vomiting was observed in 2 patients. Isolated pathogens were staphylococci (n=30), streptococci (n=3), enterococci (n=5) and gram-negative rods (n=2). Cultures were negative in 9 patients and polymicrobial in 2 patients. The infection occurred postoperatively in 31 patients (69%) and hematogenously in 14 (31%). Two-stage exchange was performed in 27 (60%), debridement with retention in 13 (29%) and one-stage exchange in 5 patients (11%). Conclusions. The applied PJI treatment algorithm including intravenous fosfomycin in the initial postoperative period was associated with infection-free outcome of 91% after a median follow-up of 6 month. The Kaplan-Meier survival method showed the probability of infection-free survival of 88.5% after 1 year. Adverse events occurred in 21 patients (46%) mostly nausea and hypokalemia were reported. Adverse events were mild and resolved completely

Dual mobility is a French concept that appeared in the 1970s and was initially intended to reduce dislocation rates. In recent years, this concept has evolved with new HA titanium spray coatings, new external macrostructures, and better-quality polyethylene. This has allowed to extend the indications to younger and therefore active populations. The objective of our work is to analyze at least 10 years a homogeneous and continuous series of 170 primary total hip replacements associating a latest generation Novae Sunfit. ®. dual mobility cup with a straight femoral stem. Only primary arthroplasties for osteoarthritis or necrosis were included. Total hip arthroplasty was always performed through a posterolateral approach. All patients had regular clinical and radiological follow-up. The average follow-up in our series was 11.5 years. The average age of the population is 71 years. At the last follow-up, there were 17 deaths, 6 losses to follow up and 9 adverse events, including 1 cup change for psoas impingement and 1 dislocation. The low rate of dislocation at 11 years confirms the high stability of the dual mobility, which should be recommended for primary procedure for patients at high risk of postoperative instability. The lack of intraprosthetic dislocation due to wear at 11 years of follow-up highlights the good quality of the latest generation of polyethylene, and the need to combine high-polished surfaces and a refined femoral neck with a dual mobility cup. Finally, the lack of aseptic loosening confirms the quality of the secondary fixation of these implants and justifies their wider use in all patients

Novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) use in Australia has increased significantly since their introduction to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). Currently, there are no specific guidelines regarding recommencement of NOAC therapy post-operatively for patients concurrently on a NOAC and undergoing arthroplasty. To address this gap in the literature, the aim of this study was to compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes in a patient cohort recommencing a therapeutic dose of NOAC within 24 hours of total hip or knee arthroplasty. Data was retrieved from a prospective registry (ACTRN1262000079698) containing hip and knee arthroplasties. Cases were labelled based on whether they presented on a therapeutic dose of NOAC prior to surgery or not. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise patient outcomes. Of 291 patients undergoing 331 primary arthroplasties, 9.3% were undertaking NOAC therapy prior to their surgery. In the NOAC cohort, there was a 34.5% adverse event rate, however on closer analysis of each event, it was found that none of these events were complications in relation to NOAC use. This was compared to 15.6% of the comparison cohort who experienced a range of complications, some involving bleeding events. PROMs improved to a similar degree amongst both groups. This study showed that recommencing therapeutic doses of NOACs in patients post hip and knee arthroplasty within 24 hours was safe. These findings will help guide larger scale analysis to better inform clinical guidelines pertaining to hip and knee arthroplasty