National guidelines suggest which investigations should be performed for patients admitted with an acute hip fracture. We have observed practice often deviates from these guidelines. Our study aims to identify the incidence of deviation with regards to blood investigations and review the effect of deviation on management, and the financial burden on the healthcare system. A total of 250 acute hip fracture admissions over 12-months period reviewed retrospectively. Admission blood tests, time of presentation, and time of operation were recorded. The cost of admission blood investigations was calculated. Seventy-nine percent of admissions had one or more non-routine blood investigation tested. Twenty-Nine percent of these tests had abnormal results and these were found to be clinically relevant in 6% of patients. The most commonly requested non-routine investigations were: LFT in 79%, Coagulation screen in 56%, and CRP in 48%. Fifteen percent of patients did not have surgery within the time frame of 36 hours. The total cost of non-routine investigations was £1995.04. Deviation from admission investigations guidelines for hip fractures without clinical indication adds little clinical value, has no effect on management, and can be a potential cause of unnecessary investigations. This in turn leads to further delays and extra costs

Thrombelastography (TEG) is a point-of-care tool that can measure clot formation and breakdown using a whole blood sample. We have previously used serial TEG analysis to define hypercoagulability and increased venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk following a major fracture requiring surgical treatment. Additionally, we have used serial TEG analysis to quantify the prolonged hypercoagulable state and increased VTE risk that ensues following a hip fracture. Recently developed cartridge-based platelet mapping (PLM) using TEG analysis can be used to activate platelets at either the adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor or at the Thromboxane A2 (AA) receptor, in order to evaluate clot strength when platelets are activated only through those specific receptors. This study aim was to evaluate platelet contribution to hypercoagulability, in order to identify potential therapeutic targets for VTE prevention. We hypothesized that there would be a platelet-predominant contribution to hypercoagulability following a hip fracture. Patients aged 50 years or older with a hip fracture treated surgically were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. Exclusion criteria were: prior history of VTE, active malignancy, or pre-injury therapeutic dose anticoagulation. Serial TEG and PLM analyses were performed at admission, post-operative day (POD) 1, 3, 5, 7 and at 2-, 4-, 6- and 12-weeks post-operatively. All patients received thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for 28 days post-operatively. Hypercoagulability was defined as maximal amplitude (MA; a measure of clot strength) over 65mm based on TEG analysis. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare MA values with this previously established threshold and a mixed effects linear regression model was used to compare MA values over time. Independent samples t-tests and Chi-sqaured analyses were used to compare between the surgical fixation and arthroplasty groups. Forty-six patients with an acute hip fracture were included, with a mean age of 77.1 (SD = 10.6) years, with 61% (N=11) being female. Twenty-six were treated with arthroplasty (56.5%), while the remainder underwent surgical fixation of their hip fractures. TEG analysis demonstrated post-operative hypercoagulability (mean MA over 65mm) at all follow-up timepoints until 12-weeks. PLM identified a platelet-mediated hypercoagulable state based on elevated ADP-MA and AA-MA, with more pronounced platelet contribution demonstrated by the AA pathway. Patients treated with arthroplasty had significantly increased AA-MA compared with ADP-MA at POD 3 and at the 12-week follow-up. Thrombelastography can be used to identify hypercoagulability and increased risk for VTE following a hip fracture. Platelet mapping analysis from this pilot study suggests a platelet-mediated hypercoagulable state that may benefit from thromboprophylaxis using an anti-platelet agent that specifically targets the AA platelet activation pathway, such as acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). This research also supports differences in hypercoagulability between patients treated with arthroplasty compared to those who undergo fracture fixation

Aim. Aim was to compare revision rates when using single versus dual antibiotic loaded cement (ABLC) in hip fracture arthroplasty and aseptic revision hip or knee arthroplasty using data from the Dutch national joint registry (LROI). Methods. All primary cemented (hemi-)arthroplasties for acute hip fractures and cemented aseptic hip or knee revision arthroplasties, were incorporated in 3 datasets. All registered implants between 2007 and 2018 were included (minimum 2 years follow-up). Primary end-point was subsequent revision rates for infection and for any reason in the single and dual ABLC groups. Cumulative crude incidence of revision was calculated using competing risk analysis. Results. A total of 22,308 hip fracture arthroplasties, 2,529 hip revision and 7,124 knee revision arthroplasties were registered and analyzed in the study period. The majority of hip fracture patients (97.1%) was treated with single ABLC. For hip and knee revision arthroplasties dual ABLC was used in 33.8% and 25.7%. The revision rate for infection in the fracture arthroplasty group was not different between groups (0.5% versus 0.8%, p=0.27). The re-revision rate following hip or knee revision based on single versus dual ABLC was not different between groups (3.2% versus 2.8%, p=0.82 for hip revision and 1.8% versus 2.5%, p=0.36 for knee revision). In addition, the re-revision rate for any reason was not different in all three datasets. The crude cumulative revision and re-revision rates for any reason based on single ABLC versus dual ABLC showed no differences in all three datasets. The crude cumulative 7-year re-revision rate for any reason following revision THA with Gentamicin ABLC use was 11.8%, with Gentamicin + Clindamycin ABLC use 13.1% and with Erythromycin + Colistin ABLC use 14.8% (ns). The crude cumulative 9-year re-revision rate for any reason following revision TKA with Gentamicin ABLC use was 17.7% and with Gentamicin + Clindamycin ABLC use 16.5% (ns). Conclusions. In conclusion, we could not show a difference in revision rate for hip fracture arthroplasty or re-revision rates for revision hip- or knee arthroplasty with the use of dual ABLC compared to single ABLC bone cement, with 7and 9 year follow up. The low percentage of dual ABLC in hip fracture arthroplasties in our registry do not enable us to make a reliable estimation of the added value in this patient category. The results of this study do not confirm the potential benefit of dual ABLC use in revision cases

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Introduction. A recent meta-analysis published in the British Medical Journal suggested an increased risk of infection, but none of the studies were large enough to reach statistical significance. A prospective, randomised trial was designed at our institution to investigate the wound healing and complications related to surgery following fracture neck of femur in the elderly. Objectives. The primary aim was to compare the wound problems and infection following two different methods of skin closure: Subcuticular monocryl suture to metal clips for closure of skin. The secondary aim was to look at the duration of surgery after both types of closure. We received ethical approval for this study. We screened and recruited all eligible patients admitted with acute hip fracture undergoing hemi-arthroplasty or dynamic hip screw. We recruited 541 patients in the study over the period of 3.5 years at our institution. Methods. The study was approved by ethics committee. Inclusion Criteria: Age 18 years and above undergoing DHS/ Hemiarthroplasty and with full mental capacity. Exclusion criteria: Patients with no capacity or undergoing Total Hip Replacement or Nailing of femur. The randomisation was done by using the sealed envelopes. The wound review was done on post op days 2, 5, 7, 10 & 14. Results. 516 patients were included in the study. They were divided in to two groups, 252 Hemiarthroplasty and 264 DHS. Average age was 79.48 yrs. (range 31–100 yrs.), 357 Females and 159 males. Total 196 patients were followed up till day 14 and rest of the patients were discharged by the 10. th. post op day. Out of 516 patients, 278 patients had clips and 238 patients had sub cut monocryl suture for the wound closure. The average score was 1.20 (range 1–3) for the wounds (the group of 278 patients) closed with clips mainly due to bruising and oozing. The average score was 0.71(range 0–1) for the wounds (the 238 group of patients) closed with sub cut monocryl mainly due to bruising. We did not find any significant wound infection in either of these groups. Conclusion. The final review of our study showed that the wounds closed with sub cut monocryl had less wound healing issues (average score 0.71) as compared to the wounds closed with clips (average score 1.20)

Hip instability is one of the early complications following total hip arthroplasty. The aetiology of hip instability is often multi-factorial. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of prosthesis with dual mobility system in reducing hip instability in high risk cases at a short term follow up. A retrospective analysis was performed covering 25 total hip arthroplasties on 24 patients (5 males and 19 females) between January 2007 and August 2008. Patient medical records and imaging were reviewed, and the indications for surgery and surgical outcome were analysed. Among 25 procedures performed, 18 were revision procedure for dislocations, loosening, peri-prosthetic fractures. Seven patients have primary procedure, among which two were for acute hip fractures. One patient underwent conversion from previously failed screw fixation for hip fracture. The 25 patients were followed up for a mean period of 12 months (ranging from 4 to 24 months). At the last follow up, all patients were able to mobilise pain-free either independently, or with aids; no patients presented an episode of hip instability. The result of our study demonstrated good early stability of total hip arthroplasty with dual mobility system (POLARCUP)

Introduction. Internal fixation of pertrochanteric fractures is evolving as newer implants are being developed. Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) is a recently introduced implant from AO/ASIF designed to compact the cancellous bone and may be particularly useful in unstable and osteoporotic hip fractures. This study is a single and independent centre experience of this implant used in management of acute hip fractures. Methods. 68 patients involving 68 PFNA nailing procedures done over a period of 2 years (2007–09) were included in the study. Average follow-up period of patients was 1 year. AO classification for trochanteric fractures was used to classify all the fractures. Radiological parameters including tip-apex distance and neck shaft angle measurement were assessed. Results. Average age of patients included in the study was 80 years. 18 patients died during the follow up period due to non-procedure related causes. Average tip-apex distance was 12.7 mm and radiological fracture union time was 5 months. Revision of short to a long PFNA was needed for periprosthetic fracture of shaft of femur in two patients. Two patients needed a complex total hip replacement eventually and further two patients had removal of the implant due to PFNA blade penetration through the femoral head. Discussion. PFNA is a technically demanding procedure and has a learning curve. Our experience shows that it is a useful implant in unstable pertrochanteric fracture fixation. A close radiological and clinical follow up is recommended due to the risk of late fracture and implant related complications

Aims

Elective orthopaedic services have had to adapt to significant system-wide pressures since the emergence of COVID-19 in December 2019. Length of stay is often recognized as a key marker of quality of care in patients undergoing arthroplasty. Expeditious discharge is key in establishing early rehabilitation and in reducing infection risk, both procedure-related and from COVID-19. The primary aim was to determine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic length of stay following hip and knee arthroplasty at a high-volume, elective orthopaedic centre.

Aims

Hip fracture patients are at higher risk of severe COVID-19 illness, and admission into hospital puts them at further risk. We implemented a two-site orthopaedic trauma service, with ‘COVID’ and ‘COVID-free’ hubs, to deliver urgent and infection-controlled trauma care for hip fracture patients, while increasing bed capacity for medical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.