In modern surgery, one main goal is to reduce perioperative and postoperative transfusion need. The haemostatic disorders, the patients’ gender and the type of the operation seems to predict the blood loss in orthopaedic surgery. It has been reported recently, an association of the Factor V Leiden mutation and with a lower rate of intra-partum blood loss,. Purpose: The aim of our study was to evaluate if there is an association between blood loss and pro c global system in orthopaedic operations. Pro C Global system is influenced by FRO C, PRO S, APC resistance (FV Leiden) and FV111. Materials and methods: We studied 42 patients, 31 women and 11 men, between 22–86 years old, who were operated in our hospital. 19 with total knee arthroplasty, 11 with total hip arthroplasty, 11 with fractures and 1 patient with amputation of -the lower leg. The blood loss for each patient was calculated according the Mercurialli formula: Total blood loss: total blood volume x (Ht preop-Ht day 5 postop)+ml of RBC transfused. The total blood loss was expressed in terms of percentage of total blood volume and defined as relative blood loss. Patients were divided into two groups with high and low relative blood loss, according the median value of the relative blood loss. Pro C global values was monitored in all patients pre-operatively on a BCT analyzer (Dade Behring). Values > 0.8 are considered normal. Results: The median value of relative blood loss was 15,05%. 21 patients were below this level and considered to have low relative blood loss. 21 patients were above this level and considered to have high relative blood loss. 18 patients had pro C Global values < 0.8 and 24 patients had Pro C Global > 0.8. Patients with low relative blood loss tend to show lower Pro C Global values than patients with high relative blood loss. (0,87 versus 0.90, p= 0.7 NS) without statistical difference. Conclusions: In this study the Pro C global system does not seems to predict perioperative blood loss in patients with orthopaedic surgery and so it is useless to be monitored preoperatively

Objectives

The Oxford hip score (OHS) is a 12-item questionnaire designed and developed to assess function and pain from the perspective of patients who are undergoing total hip replacement (THR). The OHS has been shown to be consistent, reliable, valid and sensitive to clinical change following THR. It has been translated into different languages, but no adequately translated, adapted and validated Danish language version exists.

Introduction. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are variably collected before and after total hip/knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). We assessed the generalizability of incentivized, prospectively collected PRO data for THA/TKA patient-reported outcome performance measure (PRO-PM) development. Methods. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) received PRO data voluntarily submitted by hospitals in a bundled payment model for THA/TKA procedures. Participating hospitals who collected and successfully submitted these data received an increase in their overall quality score, possibly resulting in a positive impact on model reconciliation payments. PRO data were collected from Medicare Fee-For-Service beneficiaries >= 65 years undergoing elective primary THA/TKA procedures from July 1 to August 31, 2016 at hospitals participating in the model. Pre-operative PRO and risk variable data were collected 0 – 90 days prior to surgery, while post-operative PRO data were collected 270 – 365 days following elective THA/TKA. PRO pre-op and post-op data were matched to Medicare claims data for determination of clinically eligible procedures and clinical comorbidities. We compared the characteristics of patients submitting PRO data to other elective primary THA/TKA recipients in the US. Results. Four patient characteristics were associated with HOOS Jr. mean change scores (sex, narcotic use in past 90 days, other joint pain, and back pain) and four with KOOS Jr. mean change scores (sex, Hispanic ethnicity, other joint pain, and back pain). The frequency of simultaneous bilateral procedures, dementia, trauma, and dialysis were statistically significantly lower in patients submitting PRO data compared to other US Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective primary THA/TKA, but no difference was greater than 1.5% absolute percentage points between groups. Conclusions. Offering financial incentives in alternative payment models to encourage PRO data collection and submission can produce generalizable data for PRO measure development. The possibility of non-respondent biases will need to be specifically considered in measure development

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are widely used in the orthopaedic field to assess the impact of conservative and surgical interventions from a patient's perspective. Available instruments cover a range of outcome parameters, such as pain, function, stiffness, quality of life or joint awareness. Choice of instrument for a specific study for clinical practice should include the appraisal of the psychometric characteristics of the measure. The presentation will focus on the assessment of the psychometric characteristics of PRO instruments and provide criteria for evaluating those. The concepts of objectivity, reliability and validity will be explained in the context of PRO instrument and the interpretation of score points derived from PRO instruments will be discussed detailing concepts such as minimal important change/difference, norm data, and thresholds based on external criteria. Finally, international guidelines that define standards for the various procedures on development, validation and translation of PRO instruments will be summarised

Introduction. US payers offer incentives to hospitals to report patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) for total hip arthroplasty (THA). We report THA norms for pre-op and one-year PROMs in a large multi-center cohort and compare global, hip specific scores, and abbreviated PROM measures acceptable to meet payer requirements. The HOOS 12 is a new form of the HOOS containing 12 questions that allows separate determination of pain and ADL sub-scores in addition to the total score. Methods. Between 2011–2015, 7895 primary elective THA patients enrolled in the FORCE-TJR research consortium from over 200 surgeons in 28 states. Patients completed pre-op demographics, clinical risks, PROMs, and one-year outcomes. Over 95% completed pre-op PROMs; 83% post-op. Generic and hip specific (HOOS full and HOOS-12 sub-scores, and HOOS JR global) PROMs were compared. Results. THA patients were 57% female and 49% <65 years. Mean BMI was 29.7 (5.2), 15.5% with BMI>35. Mean (SD) pre-op generic scores: SF-PCS= 31.3 (8.5), HOOS JR= 45.5 (16.2). Pre-op Sub-scores: HOOS full and HOOS12 pain mean = 41.9 (18.6), HOOS full ADL= 44.2 (19.4), HOOS12 ADL= 40.9 (19.7). Mean (SD) 1 yr PROMs: SF-PCS= 45.6(9.8), Pre-post PCS change= 14.1 (9.6). Conclusions. THA patients improved significantly on all PRO measures but HOOS full and HOOS12 scores show greater pre-post change than the HOOS JR. Surgeons may consider PRO brevity, relevance in clinical care, and change magnitude when choosing which PRO to report. The HOOS and HOOS12 full and sub- scores demonstrate the highest scores at one year and the greatest improvement from pre-op score. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Patient-reported outcome measures are a cornerstone of outcome assessment in orthopaedics. However, completing the pencil and paper questionnaires in clinic is something of a burden to the individual patient and the health care institution. We do not provide much in the way of incentives to collect PRO data. Lengthy questionnaires and hidden data analysis offer no direct benefit to the individual patient nor the clinician. Employing ePRO, utilising tablet PCs for questionnaire completion, can improve this situation considerably. Swift and cost-effective data management and instant availability of results using intuitive graphical display make questionnaire completion more rewarding. Direct feedback of PRO data during the consultation can inform the individual's care. Completing electronic questionnaires also makes computer-adaptive testing (CAT) possible. CAT creates dynamic questionnaires, adapting to the individual symptom burden of the individual patient. CAT both increases measurement precision and reduces the number of questions required. As such, ePRO assessment may help to maximise the efficiency and the utilisation of PRO data

We present a prospective two-year follow-up study of 1038 hip arthroscopies performed at a high volume tertiary referral centre for hip preservation. We feel that this manuscript is both pertinent and timely due to the advances in the field of hip preservation. We used four validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores along with the visual analog scale (VAS) and patient satisfaction scores to assess preoperative and postoperative outcomes in all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. We divided the entire cohort into patients undergoing primary and revision hip arthroscopies. We found a statistically significant improvement from preoperative to two-year postoperative PRO scores in the two subgroups. We also found a significant difference in the PRO scores at three months, one year, and two years postoperatively between the primary and revision subgroups. The revision subgroup had inferior VAS and patient satisfaction compared to the primary subgroup, however these results were not significant. The conversion to total hip arthroplasty/hip resurfacing (THA/HR) was 5.6% and 11.2% in the primary and revision subgroups, respectively. This resulted in a relative risk of 2.0 for conversion to THA/HR in the revision subgroup. We had a complication rate of 5.3 (only 0.5% of which were considered major) which was similar to that reported in the literature for hip arthroscopy. The primary purpose was to perform a survival analysis in a large mixed cohort of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy at a high volume tertiary referral centre for hip preservation with minimum two-year follow-up. The secondary purpose was to compare clinical outcomes of primary versus revision hip arthroscopy. From February 2008 to June 2012, data were prospectively collected on all patients undergoing primary or revision hip arthroscopy. Patients were assessed pre- and post-operatively with modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific Subscales (HOS-SSS). Pain was estimated on the visual analog scale (VAS). Patient satisfaction was measured on a scale from 0 to 10. There were a total of 1155 arthroscopies performed, including 1040 primary arthroscopies (926 patients) and 115 revision arthroscopies (106 patients). Of these, 931 primary arthroscopies (89.5%) in 824 patients (89.0%) and 107 revision arthroscopies (93.0%) in 97 patients (91.5%), were available for follow-up and included in our study. The mean change in patient reported outcome (PRO) scores at two-year follow-up in the primary subgroup was 17.4 for mHHS, 19.7 for HOS-ADL, 23.8 for HOS-SSS, 21.3 for NAHS, and −3.0 for VAS. The mean change in PRO scores at two-year follow-up in the revision subgroup was 13.4, 10.9, 16.1, 15.4, and −2.7, respectively. All scores improved significantly compared to pre-operatively (p<0.001). PRO scores were higher at all time points for the primary subgroup compared to the revision subgroup (p<0.05). Satisfaction was 7.7 and 7.2 for primary and revision subgroups, respectively. Of 931 primary arthroscopies, 52 (5.6%) underwent THA/HR. Of 107 revision arthroscopies, 12 (11.2%) underwent THA/HR. The relative risk of a THA/HR was 2.0 after revision procedures compared to primary procedures. The overall complication rate was 5.3%. Hip arthroscopy showed significant improvement in all PRO, VAS, and satisfaction scores at two years postoperatively. Primary arthroscopy patients showed greater PRO scores and a trend towards greater VAS compared to the revision subgroup. The relative risk of a THA/HR was 2.0 after revision procedures compared to primary procedures

The purpose of the study was to compare the mechanical properties, oxidation and wear resistance of a vitamin E blended and moderately crosslinked polyethylene for total knee arthroplasty (MXE) in comparison with clinically established polyethylene materials. The following polyethylene materials were tested: CPE (30 kGy e-beam sterilized), XLPE (75 kGy gamma crosslinked @ 100°C), ViXLPE (0.1 % vitamin E blended, 80 kGy e-beam crosslinked @ 100°C), and MXE (0.1 % vitamin E blended polyethylene, 30 kGy gamma sterilized). For the different tests, the polyethylene materials were either unaged or artificially aged for two or six weeks according to ASTM F2003-02. The oxidation index was measured based on ASTM F2102 at a 1 mm depth. Small punch testing was performed based on ASTM F2977. Mechanical properties were measured on unaged materials according to ASTM D638. Wear simulation was performed on a load controlled 3 + 1 station knee wear simulator (EndoLab GmbH, Thansau, Germany) capable of reproducing loads and movement of highly demanding activities (HDA) as well as ISO 14243-1 load profiles. The load profiles were applied for 5 million cycles (mc) or delamination of the polyethylene components. Medium size AS e.motion. ®. PS Pro (Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany) femoral and tibial components with a ZrN-multilayer surface, as well as Columbus. ®. CR cobalt-chrome alloy femoral and tibial components were tested. Particle analysis was performed on the serum samples of the ISO 14243-1 wear simulations based on ISO 17853:2011 and ASTM F1877. The analysis of the mechanical properties show that moderately crosslinked polyethylene (MXE) might be a superior material for total knee arthroplasty applications [Schwiesau et al. 2021]. The addition of vitamin E in a moderately crosslinked polyethylene prevented its oxidation, kept its mechanical characteristics, and maintained a low wear, even under a HDA knee wear simulation

Introduction. The objective of the work is construction of a multi-bioactive scaffold based on that allows a space/time control over the regeneration of damaged bones by Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw using a minimal invasive approach based on the injection of the fast-degrading pro neuro and angiogenic ELR (Elastin-Like Recombinamers) based hydrogels. Method. Chemical crosslinking facilitated the creation of multi-bioactive scaffolds using ELRs with reactive groups. Cell-loaded multi-bioactive scaffolds, prepared and incubated, underwent evaluation for adhesion, proliferation, angiogenic, and neurogenic potential. In vitro assessments utilized immunofluorescence staining and ELISA assays, while live-recorded monitoring and live-dead analysis ensured cytocompatibility. In rat and rabbit models, preformed scaffolds were subcutaneously implanted, and the regenerative process was evaluated over time. Rabbit models with MRONJ underwent traditional or percutaneous implantation, with histological evaluation following established bone histological techniques. Result. A 3D scaffold using ELR that combines various peptides with different degradation rates to guide both angiogenesis and neurogenesis has been developed. Notably, scaffolds with different degradation rates promoted distinct patterns of vascularization and innervation, facilitating integration with host tissue. This work demonstrates the potential for tailored tissue engineering, where the scaffold's bioactivities and degradation rates can control angiogenesis and neurogenesis. In an animal model of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), the scaffold showed promising results in promoting bone regeneration in a necrotic environment, as confirmed by histological and imaging analyses. This study opens avenues for novel tissue-engineering strategies where precise control over vascularization and nerve growth is crucial. Conclusion. A groundbreaking dual approach, simultaneously targeting angiogenesis and innervation, addresses the necrotic bone in MRONJ syndrome. Vascularization and nerve formation play pivotal roles in driving reparative elements for bone regeneration. The scaffold achieves effective time/space control over necrotic bone regeneration. The authors are grateful for funding from the Spanish Government (PID2020-118669RA-I00)

This study evaluates patient reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) scores after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) in matched cohorts, while simultaneously evaluating implant survivorship and 90-day hospital utilization. It is hypothesized that while both procedures would yield similar PROMIS score improvements, THA would demonstrate superior mid-term implant survivorship. Primary THA and TAA patients from 2015–2022 with minimum one-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. After applying exclusion criteria, 2,092 THAs and 478 TAAs were included for analysis. Demographics, pre- and post-operative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), revision surgeries, ED visits, and re-admissions were collected. THA and TAA patients were then propensity score matched at 2:1 ratio for age, sex, race, BMI, ASA, and comorbidities, resulting in a final cohort of 844 THAs and 455 TAAs for comparison. There were similar pre-operative PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) scores between THA and TAA, with both showing improvement at six weeks. However, THA patients exhibited lower PI scores at one year (53.0 versus 54.0; p=0.009). Pre-operative PROMIS Physical Function (PF) was worse in THA patients but showed greater improvement compared to TAA patients at both six weeks (p<0.001) and one year (p<0.001). Pre-operative PROMIS depression scores were similar and improved similarly in both groups. Joint-specific PROMs (HOOS for THA and FAAM for TAA) improved in both cohorts. THA demonstrated superior survivorship free of all-cause revision at five years compared to TAA (95% versus 77%; p<0.0001). Patients undergoing THA or TAA experienced significant improvements in their general and joint-specific PROMs post-operatively. However, patients undergoing THA demonstrated higher PROMIS PI and PF scores at one-year when compared to TAA, as well as improved survivorship. Generic PRO instruments enable comparison of medical treatments in different anatomic sites to the patients overall health

Aims. As our population ages, the number of octogenarians who will require a total hip arthroplasty (THA) rises. In a value-based system where operative outcomes are linked to hospital payments, it is necessary to assess the outcomes in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of elective, primary THA in patients ≥ 80 years old to those aged < 80. Methods. A retrospective review of 10,251 consecutive THA cases from 2011 to 2019 was conducted. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores (Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)), as well as demographic, readmission, and complication data, were collected. Results. On average, the younger cohort (YC, n = 10,251) was a mean 61.60 years old (SD 10.71), while the older cohort (OC, n = 609) was 84.25 years old (SD 3.02) (p < 0.001). The OC had greater surgical risk based on their higher mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores (2.74 (SD 0.63) vs 2.30 (SD 0.63); p < 0.001) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores (6.26 (SD 1.71) vs 3.87 (SD 1.98); p < 0.001). While the OC stayed in the hospital longer than the YC (mean 3.5 vs 2.5 days; p < 0.001), there were no differences in 90-day emergency visits (p = 0.083), myocardial infarctions (p = 0.993), periprosthetic joint infections (p = 0.214), dislocations (p = 0.993), or aseptic failure (p = 0.993). The YC was more likely to be readmitted within 90 days (3.88% vs 2.18%, Β = 0.57; p = 0.048). There were no observed differences in 12-week (p = 0.518) or one-year (p = 0.511) HOOS scores. Conclusion. Although patients ≥ 80 years old have a greater number of comorbidities than younger patients, they had equivalent perioperative complication rates and PRO scores. This study demonstrates the safety and success of elective THA in octogenarians. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):535–539

Tissue engineering is founded on the principle of pro-actively manipulating the triad of tissue regeneration. The triad consists of matrices, pluripotential cells and signaling factors. Our hypothesis is that advances in orthopedic surgery to successfully regenerate bone are accomplished by incorporating optimised matrices into the surgeon’s armamentarium. Pro Osteon is a bioactive ceramic matrix with interconnected porosity. It has been evaluated in experimental animals and used clinically as a bone graft substitute for more than two decades. It is available in slowly resorbable form composed of hydroxyapatite and as a more rapidly resorbable composite of calcium carbonate and calcium phosphate. Experiments have been conducted in sheep, rats and dogs to demonstrate consistent and predictable bone regeneration when the implant is placed in direct apposition to host bone, the host bone is viable and the interfaces between the bone and implants are biomechanically stable. Most importantly, controlled, multi-center clinical trials showed consistent efficacy and safety in humans. Either as a block or granules, Pro Osteon is biocompatible and osteophilic and osteoconductive. Bone regeneration, as demonstrated radiographically and histologically, occurs directly within the porous ceramic in traumatic defects and tumors. Where surrounding viable bone or mechanical stability is inadequate, such as posterior spinal fusion, the ceramic must be co-mixed with autograft. For indications where autograft is limited or unavailable, bone regeneration within the porosity was enhanced and fusion achieved by supplementing Pro Osteon with bone marrow and/or with growth factors. This was demonstrated experimentally and clinically. Mitogenic and/or morphogenic growth factors were demonstrated to increase the rate or degree of bone formation. Methods and equipment for intra-operative collection of concentrated platelets were shown to be a cost-effective and safe source of autologous mitogens. Using a variety of ectopic and orthotopic animals models, we have shown that autologous, purified xenogenic and recombinant growth factors will bind to the surface of Pro Osteon and initiate or stimulate the bone induction process. In conclusion, Pro Osteon is an effective matrix for bone formation. It can be used alone or it can be used in combination with pluripotential, osteogenic stem cells or with signaling proteins

Residual Legg-Calve-Perthes (LCP) deformities represent one of the most challenging disorders in hip reconstructive surgery. We assessed mid-term PRO. M. s, radiographic correction, complications and survivorship of combined surgical dislocation (SD) and periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for the treatment of complex LCP deformities. A longitudinal cohort study was performed on 31 hips with complex LCP deformities undergoing combined SD/PAO. Treatment included femoral head reshaping, trochanteric advancement and relative neck lengthening, management of intra-articular lesions and PAO. Twenty-seven (87.1%) had minimum 5-year follow up. Average age was 19.8 years with 56% female and 44% having previous surgery. At a mean 8.4 years, 85% (23/27) of the hips remain preserved (no conversion to THA). The survivorship estimates at 5 and 10 years were 93% and 85%, respectively. The median and interquartile range for mHHS increased from 64 [55–67] to 92 [70–97] (p<0.001), the WOMAC-pain improved from 60 [45–75] to 86 [75–100] (p= 0.001). An additional 19% (n=5) reported symptoms (mHHS <70) at final follow-up. UCLA activity score increased from a median of 8 [6–10] to 9 [7–10] (p=0.207). Structural correction included average improvements of acetabular inclination 15.3. o. ± 7.6, LCEA 20.7° ± 10.8, ACEA 23.4° ± 16.3, and trochanteric height 18 mm ± 10 mm (all, p<0.001). Complications occurred in two (7%) patients including one deep and one superficial wound infection. At intermediate follow-up of combined SD/PAO for complex LCP deformities, 85% of hips are preserved. This procedure provides reliable deformity correction, major pain relief, improved function and acceptable complication/failure rates

A growing number of recent investigations on the human genome, gut microbiome, and proteomics suggests that the loss of mucosal barrier function, particularly in the gastrointestinal tract, may substantially affect antigen trafficking, ultimately influencing the close bidirectional interaction between the gut microbiome and the immune system. This cross-talk is highly influential in shaping the host immune system and ultimately clinical infections. The hypothesis of the current study was that a change in microbiome and/or breach in GI epithelial barrier could be partially responsible for development of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). Multiple biomarkers of gut barrier disruption were tested in parallel in plasma samples collected as part of a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic failures or PJI (As defined by the 2018 ICM criteria). All blood samples were collected before any antibiotic was administered. Samples were tested for Zonulin, soluble CD14 (sCD14), and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) using commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney t-test, and Kruskal-Wallis test. A total of 134 patients were consented and included in the study. 44 were classified as PJI (30 chronic and 14 acute), and 90 as aseptic failures (26 primaries and 64 aseptic revisions). Both Zonulin and sCD14, but not LPS, were found to be significantly increased in the PJI group compared to non-infected cases (p<0.001; p=0.003). Higher levels of Zonulin were found in acute infections compared to chronic PJI (p=0.005. This prospective ongoing study reveals a possible link between gut permeability and the ‘gut-immune-joint axis’ in PJI. If this association continues to be born out with larger cohort recruitment and more in-depth analysis, it would have an immense implication in managing patients with PJI. In addition to administering antimicrobials, patients with PJI and other orthopedic infections may require gastrointestinal modulators such as pro and prebiotics

Aim. A growing number of recent investigations on the human genome, gut microbiome, and proteomics suggests that the loss of mucosal barrier function, particularly in the gastrointestinal tract, may substantially affect antigen trafficking, ultimately influencing the close bidirectional interaction between the gut microbiome and the immune system. This cross-talk is highly influential in shaping the host immune system function and ultimately shifting genetic predisposition to clinical outcome. Therefore, we hypothesized that a similar interaction could affect the occurrence of acute and chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). Method. Multiple biomarkers of gut barrier disruption were tested in parallel in plasma samples collected as part of a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic or PJI (As defined by the 2018 ICM criteria). All blood samples were collected before any antibiotic was administered. Samples were tested for Zonulin, soluble CD14 (sCD14), and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) using commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and ANOVA. Results. A total of 96 patients were consented and included in the study. 32 were classified as PJI (23 chronic and 9 acute), and 64 as aseptic. Both Zonulin and LPS were found to be increased in the acute PJI group 8.448 ± 7.726 ng/mL and 4.106 ± 4.260 u/mL, compared to chronic PJI (p<0.001) and aseptic revisions (p=0.025). sCD14 was found to be increased in both chronic (0.463 ± 0.168 ug/mL) and acute PJI (0.463 ± 0.389 ug/mL) compared to aseptic revisions (p<0.001). Conclusions. This prospective ongoing study reveals a possible link between gut permeability and the ‘gut-immune-joint axis’ in PJI. If this association continues to be born out with larger cohort recruitment, it would have a massive implication in managing patients with PJI. In addition to the administration of antimicrobials, patients with PJI and other orthopedic infections may require gastrointestinal modulators such as pro and prebiotics

There are pros and cons of all bearing surface options for our young patients. I pick the bearing surface for my young patients trying to maximise durability and minimise risks. For the ultra-young, ≤30 years of age patient, I use ceramic-on-ceramic. The pros of this are the best wear couple available and a favorable track record (with well designed implants). The risks can be minimised: fracture risk now decreased, runaway wear minimised with good surgical technique, impingement problems minimised with good technique and well designed implants, as well as squeaking is minimised with good design (majority of reported squeakers are of one designed socket). I don't use metal-on-metal because I am not willing to subject young patients to potentially 50+ years of high metal ion exposure. I also don't use HCLPE. This would be okay from a biologic standpoint but I still have concerns about long-term wear durability. So the marked superior wear characteristics of ceramic-ceramic win in my view. For my middle age patients, 30–60, I use HCLPE I don't use ceramic-ceramic because at some point between 30 and 60 years of age the improved wear properties are outweighed by their potential risks (fracture, impingement, squeak). HCLPE at short F/U (<15 years) appears to be durable, reliable with good wear properties so it is a reasonable choice. Using a ceramic head versus CoCr provides minimal improvement in wear properties in the lab but no marked advantage in vivo. Concerns persist about cobalt-chrome corrosion so I use ceramic heads in the majority of patients. For patients under age 60 the wear characteristics of HCLPE appear very favorable and one doesn't assume other risks seen in with metal-on-metal and ceramic-ceramic. Little justification for a hard-on-hard bearing in this patient subgroup. I use ceramic heads in majority to avoid corrosion issues

In 45 patients we assessed the functional results and complications for three different reconstructive procedures after resection of primary tumors of the proximal humerus. An osteoarticular allograft was used in 11, a clavicula pro humero operation in 15 and a tumour prosthesis in 19. The glenoid was resected with the proximal humerus in 25 patients. The axillary nerve was resected in 42 patients. The complication rate was lowest after reconstruction with a tumour prosthesis. The clavicula pro humero operation resulted in the most revisions. Cumulative survival rates for all the reconstructive procedures were similar. At follow-up at two years the functional results for the three reconstructive procedures were the same with a mean functional rating of 79% (Musculoskeletal Tumor Society). Excision of the glenoid had no influence on the functional result. Our findings indicate that the use of a tumour prosthesis is the most reliable limb-salvage procedure for the proximal humerus. The clavicula pro humero is an appropriate procedure if a prosthesis cannot be used

Introduction. Pedicle Subtraction osteotomy (PRO) in correction of severe spinal deformities is well established. Prospective analysis of its efficacy in complex spinal deformities is sparse in literature. Aims and objectives. To assess the role of PRO in correction of uniplanar and multiplanar spinal deformity and to assess the role of revision PRO in failed corrections. Material and methods. 50 patients were operated between 1996-2007 and followed up for 2 years (2-6). 27 had uniplanar kyphosis (60-128 degrees) and kyphoscoliosis was seen in 10. Failed corrections were seen in 11 uniplanar and 2 multiplanar deformities. The average pre-operative kyphosis and sagittal balance was 78.7 degrees and 22 mm (7-30) respectively. Scoliotic deformity ranged from 97-138 (average 108 degrees) and the coronal imbalance from 10-55 (average 24mm). Deformity distribution was upper dorsal 5, mid dorsal 22, dorso-lumbar 18 and lumbar 5. A single posterior approach sufficed in 47 cases while 3 required an anterior approach for reconstruction. 13 patients had pre-operative neurological deficit (bedridden 10, ambulatory 3). The average surgical time required was 300 minutes and blood loss was 800cc. The anterior defect reconstructed averaged 16.5mm (5-28). Results. Pulmonary complications occurred in 8 (21%), (embolism 1, pneumonia 2, hypoxia 5). Wound infection required debridement in 3 (8%). Failed corrections were seen in 10 (3 out of 37 in our series, 8%) due to failure of construct 2, severe disease 2, infection (active 2, quiescent 4). Neurological deterioration occurred in 1(2%), medial pedicle wall perforation. 12 patients regained ambulation (independent 7, support 5). Post-operative kyphosis and sagittal balance was 36.5 (10-108) and 10mm (5-20) respectively. Average correction was: sagittal 46.4%, coronal 37.5% and revisions 58%. The correction of kyphosis and sagittal balance was statistically comparable between primary and revision cases (p >0.05). Conclusions. PRO offers an excellent single stage decompression and controlled correction of kyphosis

Recent advances in arthroplasty for the hip and the knee have motivated modern foot and ankle research to perfect the implant and technique for the optimal total ankle replacement. Unlike in the hip where different approaches can be done with similar implants, the approach of a total ankle is intimately associated to the prosthetic design. The anterior and lateral approaches have pros and cons regarding their respective soft tissue complications, osteotomy necessity, orientation of the bone cut and gutter visualization. While both have been studied independently, very few reports have compared both in the same setting. This study retrospectively looked at the difference in reoperations rate after each ankle arthroplasty within two years estimating that both had similar rate of return to the operating room. A retrospective study was conducted from a single center between 2014 and 2017 including a total of 115 total ankles performed by one of four fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeon. Re-operations were reported in the charts as an operative report. The index approach used was determined by the surgeon's practice preference. Patients were included when they had a primary TAR in the timeframe noted and had a complete dataset up to at least the two-year data. This cohort comprised 67 anterior and 48 lateral with balanced demographic for age (95%CI 63–67 yo) and gender (47% F). The lateral group had more complex cases with higher COFAS type arthritis. Comparing the two groups, a total of 40 reoperations (7 anterior, 33 lateral) occurred in 27 patients (5A, 22L). One patient had up to four related reoperations. The only revision was in the anterior group. The only soft tissue reconstruction was an STSG in the lateral group. Nine reoperations were irrigation debridement related to an infective process (3 A, 6L). The majority (19/33) of reoperations in the lateral group were gutter debridement (8) or lateral hardware removal (11). Operative time was not statistically different. The odds ratio of having a reoperation with a laterally based TAR was 6.19 compared to the anterior group. This retrospective study outlines the intermediate results at two years of lateral and anterior total ankle replacements. This is a first study of this kind in the literature. This study did show that there were more reoperations after a laterally-based TAR than an anterior TAR, recognizing the significant case complexity imbalance between groups. This speaks to the relative increase resource utilization of laterally based TAR patients. Both implant designs carry different reoperation rates favoring the anterior group however larger prospective datasets will be needed with patient-reported outcome

Two-stage treatment of chronically infected TKA is the most common form of management in North America and most parts of the world. One-stage management has pros and cons which will not be discussed in this lecture. There is great variation of techniques and timing and little data to definitively support one technique or timing approach vs. another. Most methods are based on empirical success and logic. At the time of surgery, the first step is removal of infected implants. All metallic implants and cement should be removed. The most common places to leave cement behind inadvertently include patellar lug holes, femoral lug holes, and the anterior proximal tibia behind the tibial tubercle. Formal synovectomy should be performed. The next step is typically antibiotic-impregnated spacer placement. There are pros and cons of dynamic and static spacers with no clear evidence of superiority of one vs. another. Dynamic spacers work satisfactorily with mild to moderate bone loss, but more severe bone loss is usually better treated with static spacers and a cast. Most antibiotic spacers are made of methyl methacrylate cement with addition of high-dose antibiotics. In most cases, doses of 4–8 gm of antibiotics per pack of cement are preferred. The type of dosing depends on the specific antibiotic and the type of cement used. The most common antibiotics used are vancomycin and gentamycin. When the femoral canals have been instrumented, antibiotic-impregnated cement wands are usually placed in the medullary canal, as the medullary canals have been shown to have high risk of residual bacteria being present. The resection interval may vary and there is no clear evidence of a “best” resection interval. Practically speaking, most surgeons use a resection period of 8–16 weeks depending on the type of spacer utilised. During the resection interval, serum markers (ESR and CRP) are followed periodically. One anticipates a decline or normalization of these parameters prior to second stage reimplantation procedure. There has not been a demonstrated advantage to reaspiration of the knee before reimplantation in most circumstances. At the time of reimplantation, the spacers are removed and the knee is redebrided. The key at the time of reimplantation is to obtain good implant fixation but to also balance this with the potential for manageable extraction of the implants at some later date. Good implant fixation is important because failure rates due to mechanical failure are approximately equal to those of failure due to reinfection by 10 years. It is important to remember that reinfection risk is at least 10% by ten years, and therefore extractability of implants is also important. Post-operative management typically includes IV antibiotics, followed by oral antibiotics until final intra-operative cultures are available. The results of two-stage reimplantation are reported in many series. Most show approximately 85–95% rate of successful eradication of infection in the first five years. Reinfections, often with different organisms, may occur even late after reimplantation. By ten years after surgery survival free of mechanical failure and infection in most series drops to 80% or less due to recurrent infections and mechanical failures