Femoral nerve block is a reliable and effective method of providing anaesthesia and analgesia in the peri-operative period but there remains a small but serious risk of neurological complication. We aimed to determine incidence and outcome of neurological complications following femoral nerve block in patients who had major knee surgery. During the period January 2003 to August 2008, medical records of all patients undergoing knee surgery by Dr Myles Coolican and Dr David Parker, who had been administered femoral block for peri-operative analgesia, were evaluated. Patients with a neurological complication were invited take part in the study. A detailed physical examination including sensory responses, motor response and reflexes in both limbs was performed by an independent orthopaedic surgeon. Subjective outcome and pain specific questionnaires as well as clinical measurements were also collected. Out of 1393 patients administered with femoral nerve block anaesthesia during this period, 28 subjects (M:F= 5:23) were identified on the basis of persistent symptoms (more than three months) of femoral nerve dysfunction. All the patients had sensory dysfunction in the autonomous zone of femoral nerve sensory distribution. The incidence of neurological complications was 2.01%. One patient was deceased of unrelated causes and five patients declined to participate in the study. 14 patients out of the 22 have been examined so far. Nine cases had a one shot nerve block and five had continuous peripheral nerve block catheter. Areas of hypoesthesia/anaesthesia involving femoral nerve distribution occurred in 7 subjects and hyperaesthesia/paresthesia occurred in four. One subject had a combination of hypoesthesia and hyperesthesia in different areas of the femoral nerve distribution. Three subjects had bilateral symptoms following bilateral simultaneous nerve blocks. Dysesthesias in the affected dermatomes were found in seven cases and paresthesias were found in eight cases. Douleur Neuropathique en 4 questions (DN4) score of ï. 3. 4 was found in all the patients (average value: 5.55). The average scores for tingling, pins and needles and burning sensation (in a scale from 0 to 10) are 3.8, 3.1 and 2.9 respectively. The incidence of persistent neurological complication after femoral nerve block in our series is much higher compared to the reported incidence in the contemporary literature (Auroy Y. et al. Major complications of regional anesthesia in France: Anesthesiology 2002; 97:1274 80). The symptoms significantly influence the quality of life in the affected cases and question the value of the femoral nerve block in knee surgery

Not all knee surgery cases are created equal is a maxim that holds true for both primary and revision scenarios. Complex cases involve patients presenting with compromised bone and/or soft tissue. For primary knees, these include cases with bony deformity or deficiency, severe malalignment, arthrofibrosis, ligamentous instability or contracture, prior fracture or trauma with or without failed fixation, prior hardware complicating component placement, or compromised extensor mechanism. In revision surgery, complex scenarios include cases compromised by bone loss, deterioration of the soft tissues and resulting instability, periprosthetic fracture, leg length discrepancy, infection, and more recently, hypersensitivity reactions. In this interactive session, a moderator and team of experts will discuss strategies for evaluation and management of a variety of challenging knee case scenarios

Aim. To evaluate the costs of performing revision hip and knee surgery at a District General Hospital. Methods. A retrospective review of all revision hip and knee surgery between October 2004 and October 2006 was performed. Information was obtained from the notes and theatre log books. Each case was fully costed. The breakdown costs included implant choice, theatre time, length of stay, allograft, blood products and post-operative physiotherapy/OT. The costs were obtained from the hospital financial department and theatre invoices. Payment to the hospital is based on a specific tariff which in turn is determined by coding each patient episode. We individually coded every case, using the OPCS 4.3 coding system, and applied the appropriate tariff. The tariffs that the financial department had applied to each case were also available. A comparison was made between actual costs incurred, the expected reimbursement (from our study coding) and the actual reimbursement received (from finance department). Results. 167 revision procedures were performed (108 hips and 59 knees). The total incurred cost of revision hip surgery was £930,156 (mean £8,613 per case). The expected total reimbursement according to our coding was £938,325 (mean £8,688). The total reimbursement actually received was £806,836 (mean £7,471). The total incurred cost of revision knee surgery was £493,357 (mean £8,362). The expected total reimbursement according to our coding was £499,042 (mean £8,458). The total reimbursement was £419,157 (mean £7,104). Conclusions. Inadequate coding results in reduced income. If strict coding practices are adhered to then performing revision hip and knee surgery should be financially viable at a district general hospital

This session will present a series of challenging and complex primary and revision cases to a panel of internationally respected knee arthroplasty experts.

The primary cases will include challenges such as patient selection and setting expectations, exposure, alignment correction and balancing difficulties. In the revision knee arthroplasty scenarios issues such as bone stock loss, fixation challenges, instability and infection management will be discussed.

This will be an interactive case-based session that at its conclusion should leave the attendee with a more thorough approach to these challenging issues.

Clinical cases will be presented to a panel of experienced arthroplasty surgeons to illustrate how principles tempered by experience, are applied to challenging problems. (request pertinent additional material from kellyvince@mac.com)

This session will present a series of challenging and complex primary and revision cases to a panel of internationally respected knee arthroplasty experts.

The primary cases will include challenges such as patient selection and setting expectations, exposure, alignment correction and balancing difficulties. In the revision knee arthroplasty scenarios issues such as bone stock loss, fixation challenges, instability, and infection management will be discussed.

This will be an interactive case based session that at its conclusion should leave the attendee with a more thorough approach to these challenging issues.

This session will deal with common problems and challenges in knee arthroplasty surgery. It will include discussion of indications, surgical options, surgical technique, and management of complications.

This symposium is intended to focus on common problems that face all of us as orthopaedic surgeons rather than deal with issues that are almost never encountered. The panel includes a group of experienced surgeons who deal with such problems in their own practice.

This session will present a series of challenging and complex primary and revision cases to a panel of internationally respected knee arthroplasty experts.

The primary cases will include challenges such as patient selection and setting expectations, exposure, alignment correction and balancing difficulties. In the revision knee arthroplasty scenarios issues such as bone stock loss, fixation challenges, instability and infection management will be discussed.

This will be an interactive case-based session that at its conclusion should leave the attendee with a more thorough approach to these challenging issues.

This session will present a series of challenging and complex primary and revision cases to a panel of knee arthroplasty experts. A variety of cases representing the spectrum of not uncommonly presenting pathologies will be discussed in terms of appropriate work-up, clinical management, surgical approach, and aftercare. This will be an interactive case-based session that at its conclusion should leave the attendee with a more thorough approach to these challenging issues.

“Expert opinion” is the lowest totem on the academic pole- and yet, “evidence based” medicine does not always provide us answers for the particular, the unusual clinical problem. Well-controlled studies are precisely that: “well controlled”. Life may be randomised, but falls short of being “well controlled”.

The challenge and honor of moderating a panel of experienced and articulate colleagues is to bring out “how they think” and how they formulate a plan for complex cases. The panel members are not only experienced practitioners, but they are the authors of studies that shape our profession. What are the limits to the studies they have published? What insight can they provide us to help understand “level 1” data more astutely? What biases and assumptions support their methods? Nothing achieves that with greater clarity than presentation of complex cases to an accomplished panel.

Several ordinary clinical problems are presented to establish current practice, followed by the unexpected outcomes to illustrate how experts deal with adversity.

INTRODUCTION

Ligament balancing aims to equalize lateral and medial gaps or tensions for optimal functional outcomes. Balancing can now be measured as lateral and medial contact forces during flexion (Roche 2014). Several studies found improved functional outcomes with balancing (Unitt 2008; Gustke 2014a; Gustke 2014b) although another study found only weak correlations (Meneghini 2016). Questions remain on study design, optimal lateral-medial force ratio, and remodeling over time. Our goals were to determine the functional outcomes between pre-op and 6 months post-op, and determine if there was a range of balancing parameters which gave the highest scores.

“Expert opinion” is the lowest totem on the academic pole and yet, “evidence based” medicine does not always provide us answers for the particular, the unusual clinical problem. Well-controlled studies are precisely that: “well-controlled”. Life may be randomised, but falls short of being “well-controlled”.

The challenge and honor of moderating a panel of experienced and articulate colleagues is to bring out “how they think” and how they formulate a plan for complex cases. The panel members are not only experienced practitioners, but they are the authors of studies that shape our profession. What are the limits to the studies they have published? What insight can they provide us to help understand “level 1” data more astutely? What biases and assumptions support their methods? Nothing achieves that with greater clarity than presentation of complex cases to an accomplished panel.

Several ordinary clinical problems are presented to establish current practice, followed by the unexpected outcomes to illustrate how experts deal with adversity.

“Expert opinion” is the lowest totem on the academic pole- and yet, “evidence based” medicine does not always provide us answers for the particular, the unusual clinical problem. Well-controlled studies are precisely that: “well controlled”. Life may be randomised, but falls short of being “well controlled”.

The challenge and honor of moderating a panel of experienced and articulate colleagues is to bring out “how they think” and how they formulate a plan for complex cases. The panel members are not only experienced practitioners, but they are the authors of studies that shape our profession. What are the limits to the studies they have published? What insight can they provide us to help understand “level 1” data more astutely? What biases and assumptions support their methods? Nothing achieves that with greater clarity than presentation of complex cases to an accomplished panel.

Several ordinary clinical problems are presented to establish current practice, followed by the unexpected outcomes to illustrate how experts deal with adversity.

INTRODUCTION

Important surgical requirements for optimal function are accurate bone cut alignments and soft tissue balancing. From an unbalanced state, balancing can be achieved by Surgical Corrections including soft tissue releases, bone cut modifications, and changing tibial insert thickness. Surgical balancing can now be quantified using an instrumented tibial trial, but the procedures and results need further investigation. Our major purpose was to determine the initial balancing after making the bone cuts, and the final accuracy of balancing after Surgical Corrections. A related purpose was to determine the number and effectiveness of different Corrections in achieving balancing.

Aim

Persistent wound drainage has been recognized as one of the major risk factors of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Currently, there is no consensus on the management protocol for patients who develop wound drainage after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The objective of our study was to describe a multimodal protocol for managing draining wounds after TJA and assess the outcomes.

“Expert opinion” is the lowest totem on the academic pole- and yet, “evidence based” medicine does not always provide us answers for the particular, the unusual clinical problem. Well-controlled studies are precisely that: “well controlled”. Life may be randomised, but falls short of being “well controlled”.

The challenge and honoufavourr of moderating a panel of experienced and articulate colleagues is to bring out “how they think” and how they formulate a plan for complex cases. The panel members are not only experienced practitioners, but they are the authors of studies that shape our profession. What are the limits to the studies they have published? What insight can they provide us to help understand “level 1” data more astutely? What biases and assumptions support their methods? Nothing achieves that with greater clarity than presentation of complex cases to an accomplished panel.

Several ordinary clinical problems are presented to establish current practice, followed by the unexpected outcomes to illustrate how experts deal with adversity.

Introduction:

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating diagnosis that carries a significant rate of associated mortality and places a large burden on health care systems. Treatment protocols often include combined intravenous antibiotics and staged revision surgery with locally-delivered antibiotics via PMMA cement spacers and/or beads. One disadvantage of PMMA is the need for later removal. Antibiotic releasing Calcium Sulphate beads (CaSO₄) have had promising results in revision joint surgery and are absorbable, making later removal unnecessary. We report on use in a tertiary referral centre in the UK and present our initial findings.

Introduction

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is one of the most common ligament injuries. Several ACL reconstructions exist and are consequently performed. An accurate and comprehensive description of knee motion is essential for an adequate assessment of these surgeries, in terms of restoring knee motion.

Literature has suggested that obese (BMI >30) and morbidly obese (BMI > 35) patients should not be offered surgery as a day case due to increases in complication and readmission rates. At Torbay hospital, patients are routinely offered day case surgery, in a specialist day case unit, regardless of BMI. This is done with minimal complications and enables a higher throughput of patients and at least 75% of surgical procedures to be performed as a day case, as per NHS guidelines.

We present 12 year data of day case knee arthroscopy surgery performed at Torbay hospital. Over 12 years, 3421 knee arthroscopies were performed. 649 were performed on obese patients and 222 on morbidly obese patients. No anaesthetic complications were observed in any of the obese patient groups and readmissions rates (up to 28 days) were 0.8% in the morbidly obese group and 0.9% in the Obese group, compared to 0.9% for patients with BMI <30.

Our data shows that day case surgery can be performed on all patients regardless of BMI and patient obesity. We believe that other units should offer surgery to obese and morbidly obese patients to allow increased efficiency and achievement of NHS day case guidelines.

Reported wound complication in below knee surgery can be quite high. Recent study demonstrated that increased blood loss and hematoma formation increase wound complications especially in foot and ankle surgeries. Despite the evidence on the benefit of TXA on blood loss in TKA and THA it is not routinely used by surgeon in below knee surgery. To assess the efficacy and safety of this medication in reducing wound complication and blood loss and the risk of thromboembolic complications in patients undergoing below knee surgery. A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Ovid, the Cochrane Library and AAOS and AOFAS conference proceedings was conducted. The primary outcome was the rate of wound complications. Data were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Nine studies involving 861 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis indicated that TXA, when compared to a control group, reduced wound complications (OR, 0.54; 95% IC, 0.31 to 0.95, p = 0,03), blood loss (MD = −149,4 ml; 95% CI, −205,3ml to −93,6ml), post-operative drainage (MD = −169,8 ml; 95% CI, −176,7 to −162,9 ml) and hemoglobin drop (MD = −8,75 g/dL; 95% IC, −9,6 g/dL to −7,8 g/dL). There was no significant difference in thromboembolic events (RR 0,53; 95% CI, 0,15 - 1,90; p = 0,33). This study demonstrated that TXA could be use in below knee surgery to reduce wound complication and blood loss without increased thromboembolic complications. The small number of studies limit the findings interpretation. Further studies are needed to sustain those resutls