Preoperative anaemia and intraoperative blood loss result in ∼90% of individuals being anaemic following hip and knee arthroplasty. Reducing blood loss offers the opportunity to improve outcomes and reduce the risk of transfusion and costs. This review's aim was to determine the effectiveness of drugs for preventing blood loss, and identify optimal dose, route, and timing of administration.

Cochrane network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted. Inclusion criteria: adults undergoing primary or revision elective hip or knee arthroplasty. Drugs studied: tranexamic acid (TXA), aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid, desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants, and non-fibrin sealants. Primary outcomes: need for allogenic blood transfusion, all• cause mortality (within 30 days). Secondary outcomes: mean number of transfusion episodes, re-operation, length of hospital stay and adverse events (DVT, PE, CVA, MI).

102 studies with 8418 participants. Trials included more women (63%). 47 studies (4398 participants) were included within the blood transfusion NMA. TXA given intra-articularly and orally at a total dose of greater than 3g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively ranked the highest, with anticipated absolute effect of 147 fewer transfusions per 1000 (53% chance ranking 1st) (relative risk(RR) 0.02, 95% credible interval(CrI) 0–0.31); moderate-certainty). Aprotinin (RR 0.59, 95%:CrI 0.36–0.86; low certainty evidence), fibrin (RR 0.86, CrI 0.25–2.93; very-low certainty) and EACA (RR 0.60, 95%:CrI 0.29–1.27; very-low certainty) were not shown to be as effective as TXA.

TXA was the most effective drug for preventing bleeding in lower limb arthroplasty. Aprotinin and EACA were not as effective. Currently, the optimal dose, route and timing of administration of TXA is unclear. However, TXA given at higher doses and via mixed routes ranked higher in the treatment hierarchy. Oral TXA may be as effective as intavenous. There was no evidence of harm associated with higher doses of TXA.

Noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a common cause of preventable deafness in adults and exposure to loud noise at work is a significant risk factor for its development. In order to protect the hearing of workers in the U.K., the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions, established the Control of Noise at Work Regulations (2005). The objectives of this study were to define the levels of noise exposure for the surgeon, assistant, scrub nurse and anaesthetist during total hip and knee arthroplasty surgery. In addition, we sought to determine whether the noise exposure during these procedures reaches or exceeds the action values set out by the U.K. Noise at Work Regulations (2005). To our knowledge no real-time assessment of personal noise exposure has been performed simultaneously on multiple members of the theatre team during arthroplasty surgery. Individual noise exposure during arthroplasty hip and knee surgery was recorded using a personal noise dosemeter system model 22 (DM22) (Pulsar instruments, Filey, U.K.). Recordings were taken real-time during five separate theatre sessions. Each theatre session included two arthroplasty procedures and lasted approximately 4hrs. Personal noise exposure was expressed in terms of peak sound pressure and an average noise exposure over an 8-hour time-period to reflect the noise experienced by the ear over a working day. In all three sessions involving total hip replacement surgery the peak sound pressure, for the operating surgeon, exceeded the exposure action values set out by the U.K. Noise at Work Regulations. Theatre sessions involving total knee replacement surgery did not exceed any exposure action values. The peak sound pressures experienced during total hip replacement surgery are too high and mandate that the surgeon should be provided with appropriate hearing protection. In addition, if the upper exposure action value is routinely exceeded then the theatre should be designated a hearing protection zone

Aims. Of growing concern in arthroplasty is the emergence of atypical infections, particularly Cutibacterium (formerly Propionibacterium) sp. infections. Currently, the dermal colonization rate of Cutibacterium about the hip is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate colonization rates of Cutibacterium sp. at locations approximating anterior and posterolateral approaches to the hip joint. Methods. For this non-randomized non-blinded study, 101 adult patients scheduled for hip or knee surgery were recruited. For each, four 3 mm dermal punch biopsies were collected after administration of anaesthesia, but prior to antibiotics. Prebiopsy skin preparation consisted of a standardized preoperative 2% chlorhexidine skin cleansing protocol and an additional 70% isopropyl alcohol mechanical skin scrub immediately prior to biopsy collection. Two skin samples 10 cm apart were collected from a location approximating a standard direct anterior skin incision, and two samples 10 cm apart were collected from a lateral skin incision (suitable for posterior, direct-lateral, or anterolateral approaches). Samples were cultured for two weeks using a protocol optimized for Cutibacterium. Results. A total of 23 out of 404 cultures (collected from 101 patients) were positive for a microorganism, with a total of 22 patients having a positive culture (22%). Overall, 15 of the cultures in 14 patients were positive for Cutibacterium sp. (65%), of which Cutibacterium acnes comprised the majority (n = 13; 87%). Other isolated microorganisms include coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (n = 6), Clostridium (n = 1), and Corynebacterium (n = 1). Of all positive cultures, 15 were obtained from the anterior location (65%), of which seven (60%) were from the most proximal biopsy location. However, these findings were not statistically significant (anterior vs lateral, p = 0.076; proximal vs distal, p =0.238). Conclusion. Approximately 14% (14/101) of the patients demonstrated a positive Cutibacterium colonization about the hip, the majority anteriorly. Given the high colonization rate of Cutibacterium, alternative skin preparations for total hip arthroplasty should be considered. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):52–56

Introduction. Cutibacterium acnes (C. acnes) is now recognized as a clinical entity in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) of the shoulder and spine. However, the colonization rate of C. acnes in the adult hip is currently unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the rate of C. acnes colonization from the skin of healthy subjects from various anatomic locations corresponding to direct anterior and lateral/posterolateral surgical approaches. Methods. 90 patients scheduled for hip or knee surgery were recruited for cultured biopsies. Four 3-mm dermal punch biopsies were collected after administration of anesthesia, but prior to delivery of perioperative antibiotics. Pre-biopsy skin prep consisted of a standardized pre-operative 2% chlorhexidine skin cleanse and an additional 70% isopropyl alcohol mechanical skin scrub immediately prior to biopsy collection. Two culture samples 10-cm apart were collected from a location approximating a standard direct anterior skin incision, and two samples 10-cm apart were collected from a location approximating a lateral skin incision (suitable for a posterior, direct-lateral or anterolateral surgical approach). Samples were cultured for two weeks. Results. 22 of the 90 (24%) patients had a positive culture biopsy, fourteen of which (16% of all patients) were positive for C. acnes. Ten (71%) of the culture positive biopsies for C. acnes were obtained from the anterior location with 50% of those obtained from the most proximal sample site. Conclusions. Approximately 16% of the patients in the study demonstrated positive C. acnes colonization about the hip, the majority of which occurred from an anterior location. C. acnes should be considered in the diagnosis of PJI after THA. Given the high rate of skin colonization, particularly as regards the direct anterior approach to the hip, these results have stimulated consideration for different skin preparations for the THA patient. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. The Best Practice Tariff (BpT) for primary THR / TKR was established in 2014 and rewards good clinical practice with a £550 uplift on the £5000 basic reimbursement. For an ‘average unit’ performing 220 primary THR and 260 eligible knee surgeries (NJR data) this equates to £265,000 per year or over £1million since its inception. The aim of this study was to investigate why Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Trust was not receiving this reimbursement. Materials & Methods. BpT is dependent on four factors (NHS England, PROMS): (i) the provider not having an average health gain significantly below the national average, (ii) a minimum National Joint Registry compliance rate of 85%, (iii) an NJR unknown consent rate below 15%, and (iv) a PROMs participation rate of 50%. Results. Data from NHS Digital confirmed that the Trust's health gains were not significantly below average. Our NJR data was exemplary with 95% compliance rate and an unknown consent rate of only 3%. Based on HES data our PROMS returns were found to be considerably below the 50% target each month (Table 1). The HES data being compared against (269 hip replacement, 334 knee replacement) was far greater than our hospital NJR figures (165 hips, 151 knees). NHS England (PROMs) confirmed that BpT was collated on a Trust not hospital level. Our investigation established that PROMs data for the other hospital within our Trust was not being submitted under the correct ‘ODS’ code and was therefore not contributing to the Trust totals. Discussion. This investigation has precipitated resubmission of all data to NHS Digital under the correct Trust code. This will ensure compliance with the 50% target for PROMs Q1 submission, overall conformity with the BpT standards and a reimbursement of £370,000 to the Trust. For any figures and tables, please contact the authors directly

Aims

The burden of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) continues to grow. The surgery is complex and associated with significant costs. Regional rTHA networks have been proposed to improve outcomes and to reduce re-revisions, and therefore costs. The aim of this study was to accurately quantify the cost and reimbursement for a rTHA service, and to assess the financial impact of case complexity at a tertiary referral centre within the NHS.

Aims

We investigated patient characteristics and outcomes of Vancouver type B periprosthetic fractures treated with femoral component revision and/or osteosynthesis.

To assess the sustainability of our institutional bone bank, we calculated the final product cost of fresh-frozen femoral head allografts and compared these costs with the use of commercial alternatives. Between 2007 and 2010 all quantifiable costs associated with allograft donor screening, harvesting, storage, and administration of femoral head allografts retrieved from patients undergoing elective hip replacement were analysed.

From 290 femoral head allografts harvested and stored as full (complete) head specimens or as two halves, 101 had to be withdrawn. In total, 104 full and 75 half heads were implanted in 152 recipients. The calculated final product costs were €1367 per full head. Compared with the use of commercially available processed allografts, a saving of at least €43 119 was realised over four-years (€10 780 per year) resulting in a cost-effective intervention at our institution. Assuming a price of between €1672 and €2149 per commercially purchased allograft, breakeven analysis revealed that implanting between 34 and 63 allografts per year equated to the total cost of bone banking.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1307–11

Objectives

To investigate psychosocial and biomedical outcomes following total hip replacement (THR) and to identify predictors of recovery from THR.

Infection of a total hip replacement (THR) requires component removal and thorough local debridement. Usually, long-term antibiotic treatment in conjunction with a two-stage revision is required. This may take several months. One-stage revision using antibiotic-loaded cement has not gained widespread use, although the clinical and economic advantages are obvious. Allograft bone may be impregnated with high levels of antibiotics, and in revision of infected THR, act as a carrier providing a sustained high local concentration.

We performed 37 one-stage revision of infected THRs, without the use of cement. There were three hips which required further revision because of recurrent infection, the remaining 34 hips (92%) stayed free from infection and stable at a mean follow-up of 4.4 years (2 to 8). No adverse effects were identified. Incorporation of bone graft was comparable with unimpregnated grafts.

Antibiotic-impregnated allograft bone may enable reconstruction of bone stock, insertion of an uncemented implant and control of infection in a single operation in revision THR for infection.