Patients with a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are considered at very high risk for recurrence after lower limb arthroplasty (LLA). However, the chance of a new VTE episode after LLA has not been yet quantified. The aim of this study was to define the incidence of VTE recurrence following knee and hip arthroplasty. The case notes for all LLA patients treated at our hospital from 2009 to 2011 were reviewed. There were 5946 primary and revision LLA operations in total; 118 of these interventions were performed in 106 patients with a history of VTE. This group included 69 females and 37 males with a mean age of 69.9. Routine thromboprophylaxis for LLA patients included mechanical (footpumps & TED stockings) plus chemical prophylaxis using Aspirin 150 mg for 6 weeks. Patients with a VTE history had the same mechanical prophylaxis but received warfarin for 3 months. There were no fatal VTEs within 90 days of surgery. There were 5 episodes (4.2%) of VTE recurrence and specifically 4 PE and one DVT (femoral vein) at 4 months after the operation. Two of the PEs were asymptomatic, diagnosed on CTPA scans being requested for low O2 saturations on routine monitoring. In the group of patients without a VTE history there were 35 VTE episodes (0.6%), indicating a significantly lower rate of VTE (p=0.001) in comparison with the study group. Patients with a history of VTE had a 4.2% chance of having a further VTE. This is seven times greater than the rate among all other patients despite using more aggressive chemoprophylaxis

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. The National Hip Fracture Audit currently provides a framework for service evaluation. This evaluation is based upon the assessment of process rather than assessment of patient-centred outcome and therefore it fails to provide meaningful data regarding the clinical effectiveness of treatments. This study aims to capture data from the cohort of patients who present with a fracture of the proximal femur at a single United Kingdom Major Trauma Centre. Patient-centred outcomes will be recorded and provide a baseline cohort within which to test the clinical effectiveness of experimental interventions.

We report the incidence and location of deep-vein thrombosis in 312 patients who had sustained high-energy, skeletal trauma. They were investigated using magnetic resonance venography and Duplex ultrasound.

Despite thromboprophylaxis, 36 (11.5%) developed venous thromboembolic disease with an incidence of 10% in those with non-pelvic trauma and 12.2% in the group with pelvic trauma. Of patients who developed deep-vein thrombosis, 13 of 27 in the pelvic group (48%) and only one of nine in the non-pelvic group (11%) had a definite pelvic deep-vein thrombosis. When compared with magnetic resonance venography, ultrasound had a false-negative rate of 77% in diagnosing pelvic deep-vein thrombosis. Its value in the pelvis was limited, although it was more accurate than magnetic resonance venography in diagnosing clots in the lower limbs. Additional screening may be needed to detect pelvic deep-vein thrombosis in patients with pelvic or acetabular fractures.

There is a high risk of venous thromboembolism when patients are immobilised following trauma. The combination of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) with graduated compression stockings is frequently used in orthopaedic surgery to try and prevent this, but a relatively high incidence of thromboembolic events remains. Mechanical devices which perform continuous passive motion imitate contractions and increase the volume and velocity of venous flow.

In this study 227 trauma patients were randomised to receive either treatment with the Arthroflow device and LMWH or only with the latter. The Arthroflow device passively extends and plantarflexes the feet. Patients were assessed initially by venous-occlusion plethysmography, compression ultrasonography and continuous wave Doppler, which were repeated weekly without knowledge of the category of randomisation. Those who showed evidence of deep-vein thrombosis underwent venography for confirmation. The incidence of deep-vein thrombosis was 25% in the LMWH group compared with 3.6% in those who had additional treatment with the Arthroflow device (p < 0.001). There were no substantial complications or problems of non-compliance with the Arthroflow device. Logistic regression analysis of the risk factors of deep-vein thrombosis showed high odds ratios for operation (4.1), immobilisation (4.3), older than 40 years of age (2.8) and obesity (2.2).