The major benefit of TKA with tourniquet is operating in a bloodless field. A possible secondary benefit is a better cement bone interface for fixation.

The disadvantages of tourniquet use for TKA include multiple risk factors both local and systemic: Nerve damage; Altered hemodynamics with limb exsanguinations (15–20% increase in circulatory volume) and reactive hyperemia with tourniquet release (10% increase in limb size increasing soft tissue tension and secondary pain); Delay in recovery of muscle function; Increased risk of DVT with direct trauma to vessel walls and increased levels of thrombin-antithrombin complexes; A 5.3× greater risk for large venous emboli propagation and transesophageal echogenic particles; Vascular injury with higher risk in atherosclerotic, calcified arteries; Increase in wound healing disturbances.

Our initial experience with TKA without tourniquet was in high risk patients with previous DVT or PE, multiple scarring, or compromised cardiovascular status. We have used this method on all patients for the last eight years. The protocol includes regional anesthesia, incision and approach made with 90-degree knee flexion, meticulous hemostasis, jet lavage and filtered carbon dioxide delivered to dry and prepare bone beds for cementation, application of topical tranexamic acid and routine closure. We have encountered no differences in blood loss or transfusion rates, less post-operative pain, faster straight leg raise and knee flexion gains, and fewer wound healing disturbances. We recommend TKA sans tourniquet. Let it bleed!

Tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty is convenient for the surgeon and provides a bloodless field for expeditious surgery and a dry field for cementation, but can best be described as an orthopaedic tradition. It is logical for complex anatomy of ligament, nerve, and vessel surgery but it may not be necessary for total knee replacement. In one recent randomised trial, the absence of the tourniquet was not found to affect the quality of cement fixation. There are numerous potential downsides to the use of a tourniquet including decrease range of motion, delayed recovery, increased pain, wound complications, micro-emboli, neuropathy, and increased VTE. There are also a number of complications associated with the use of a tourniquet including arterial thrombosis, skin irritation below the tourniquet, post-operative hyperemia, blood loss, less accurate intra-operative assessment, and it complicates intravenous drug administration. Studies of range of motion have shown that when there is a difference noted, the range of motion is consistently better without tourniquet use. When a tourniquet is utilised it has been found to be advantageous to only use of tourniquet for a minimal amount of the case, typically when cementing is performed. Functional strength has also been found to be improved without the use of a tourniquet. This was attributed to muscle damage, tourniquet-induced ischemia, and compressive injury. Increased peri-operative pain has also been reported in randomised trials associated with the use of a tourniquet. Edema, swelling, and limb girth issues have also been noted to be associated with tourniquet use. Exsanguinating a limb will result in swelling approximately 10% of the original volume half due to a return of blood, and half due to reactive hyperemia. Longer tourniquet times are also associated with increased wound drainage and more wound hypoxia. Tourniquet use has also been associated with embolic phenomenon with several times greater risk of large emboli associated with tourniquet use.

A number of complications have been associated with tourniquet use including thromboembolic complications. In one study where quantitative MRI was utilised on both thighs after unilateral total knee replacement with and without a tourniquet, the tourniquet group showed more atrophy with a loss of 20% of the volume compared to the normal side in total knees performed with a tourniquet which also performed clinically worse. There is a small but substantial risk of arterial thrombosis particularly in patients that have atherosclerotic plaque. Ironically there is a risk of increased post-operative blood loss due to the post-tourniquet “blush” as the blood pressure and pain increase hours after a surgical procedure is completed. There is also difficulty in identifying and coagulating posterior and lateral geniculate vessels with the components in place. Utilizing a tourniquet also interferes with intra-operative assessment of patella tracking, range of motion, ligament stability, and gap balancing. Randomised clinical trials have concluded that there is less pain and quicker recovery without the use of a tourniquet. There have also been reports of less swelling, increased range of motion, less analgesic use and better clinical outcome when a tourniquet is not utilised. A meta-analysis of systematic reviews favored not utilizing a tourniquet due to the decrease in complication rate and the improvement in clinical results. While it is standard practice in the US to utilise a tourniquet, the strong consensus of the literature on the subject favors either not using a tourniquet or minimizing the use of a tourniquet for the period of time necessary for a very dry field for cement fixation.

The use of a tourniquet when performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is subject to different methodologies. Some surgeons see no need to use a tourniquet, others use the tourniquet only during cementation, some utilise the tourniquet from prior to incision to after cementation, while others maintain throughout and release after closure. At our center, use of the tourniquet is part of the TKA routine: position the patient, administer antibiotics, inflate the tourniquet, note pressure and time, complete preparation and draping, set time-out, and cut. We release the tourniquet after cementation of components, prior to assessment of patellofemoral tracking and closure. Advantages of using a tourniquet are enhanced TKA durability, less blood during cementation, and reduced intra-operative blood loss and need for transfusion. Adequately preparing the bone surfaces and cleaning away blood and fat are essential to good cement technique, providing better interdigitation and penetration and resulting in fewer radiolucencies and longer survivorship. Lateral retinacular release, performed to alleviate patellar maltracking, is not a benign procedure and is associated with increased patellar complications including loosening, fracture, and avascular necrosis. Several articles, including one from our center, have studied the effect of tourniquet deflation and patellar tracking, observing 31% to 86% reduction in maltracking and indication for lateral release when assessing after deflation. A prospective study of 28 patients undergoing same day bilateral TKA using a tourniquet inflated prior to incision and released after cementation on one side and either no tourniquet or tourniquet only during cementation of the contralateral side found slightly lowered quadriceps strength in the tourniquet group that persisted for up to 3 months. However, another recent prospective study of 120 patients assessing wound closure in 90 degrees flexion versus full extension, with the combination of an inflated versus deflated tourniquet, found that closure of the knee in flexion after tourniquet deflation significantly decreased post-operative pain and promoted early recovery of ROM. Safe use of the tourniquet is essential to avoid neurologic injury, and includes pneumatic, wider, contoured cuffs, moderate maximum applied pressure, and monitoring during release for emboli and metabolite return. Operative efficiency minimises overall operative and tourniquet time, thereby reducing risk of complications. Several meta-analysis reviews have compared TKA performed with versus without use of a tourniquet. All found using a tourniquet resulted in a significant decrease in operative time and intra-operative blood loss, but a trend for increase in deep vein thrombosis and wound complications. Other meta-analysis articles have studied time of tourniquet release comparing early versus late. These studies unanimously found late release to be associated with substantial increase in post-operative complications. Some studies found early release before wound closure to be associated with increased total blood loss and greater drop in hemoglobin while the other studies reported no differences in these measures. Our practice is to deflate the tourniquet prior to wound closure and to achieve hemostatis. The use of a tourniquet to perform TKA facilitates efficient operative technique, improves visualization of anatomical structures, facilitates the surgeon's focus on proper component positioning, and facilitates good cement technique.

For as long as surgeons have been performing total and partial knee arthroplasty, surgeons have debated the efficacy, safety, and requirement of a pneumatic tourniquet. Advocates claim that blood loss is less, visualization is improved, and the cement technique is better with the use of a tourniquet. Others would argue that the use of the tourniquet or limited tourniquet use is safer, does not increase blood loss, and does not compromise visualization and cementing technique.

Multiple meta-analyses have been performed that provide very little true evidence of superiority. One such study from Yi et al, concludes that the use of the tourniquet reduces surgical time, intraoperative and total blood loss, but increases postoperative total blood loss. They also conclude that DVT and SSI are “relatively augmented” with use. There may be issues with the timing of tourniquet release in these pooled studies, with others stating that releasing the tourniquet prior to wound closure, supposedly for hemostasis, significantly increases the total and calculated blood loss. Huang et al report that with proper control in the amount of pressure, a debatable topic in and of itself, and shorter duration of inflation, release after closure can reduce blood loss without increased complications. One additional issue is patellar tracking, and the need to lateral release. The tourniquet significantly affects assessment of tracking and the need for lateral release, potentially causing the surgeon to unnecessarily perform a lateral release with the tourniquet inflated.

Lastly, research has suggested that using a tourniquet may affect recovery of lower extremity strength and function. Dennis et al compared quadriceps strength and found that use of the tourniquet resulted in “slightly” lower strength postoperatively out to 3 months. The fatal flaw in this study and others is that there is no accepted minimal clinically important difference for quad function, and thus they powered their study to detect a difference of 12 Nm, and the actual difference, while statistically significant, did not even meet their arbitrary power set point. Thus, while strength may be slightly impaired by the use of a tourniquet, it was not different enough to meet their criteria. Additionally, in their study, 64% of the “no-tourniquet” knees actually had a tourniquet used for cementation to “minimise blood at the bone-cement interface and maximise fixation”. Clearly, even these authors are concerned with the results of not using a tourniquet.

These authors utilise a pneumatic tourniquet in all cases of primary TKA and release the tourniquet prior to closure to ensure hemostasis and accurately assess patellar tracking. In doing so, we use the methodology of limb occlusion pressure to minimise the pressure to that necessary for ensuring a clear field. Additionally, these authors emphasise the ultimate in surgical efficiency allowing for extremely short tourniquet times, even in the most difficult cases. As an example, in 1300 consecutive obese patients with BMI equal or greater than 35, the average tourniquet time for primary TKA was 49 minutes. These short times, with the minimum pressure allow for the best of both worlds and little to no downside.

The major benefit of TKA with tourniquet is operating in a bloodless field. A possible secondary benefit is a better cement-bone interface for fixation.

The disadvantages of tourniquet use for TKA include multiple risk factors both local and systemic: Nerve damage, Altered hemodynamics with limb exsanguinations (15–20% increase in circulatory volume) and reactive hyperemia with tourniquet release (10% increase in limb size increasing soft tissue tension and secondary pain), Delay in recovery of muscle function, Increased risk of DVT with direct trauma to vessel walls and increased levels of thrombin-antithrombin complexes, A 5.3x greater risk for large venous emboli propagation and transesophageal echogenic particles, Vascular injury with higher risk in atherosclerotic, calcified arteries, Increase in wound healing disturbances, Obese patients TKA with tourniquet show impaired endothelial function and more DVTs.

Our initial experience with TKA without tourniquet was in high risk patients with previous DVT or PE, multiple scarring, or compromised cardiovascular status. We have used this method on all patients for the last 14 years. The protocol includes regional anesthesia, incision and approach made with 90-degree knee flexion, meticulous hemostasis, jet lavage and filtered carbon dioxide delivered to dry and prepare bone beds for cementation, application of topical tranexamic acid and routine closure. We have encountered no differences in blood loss or transfusion rates, cement penetration/ fixation, less postoperative pain, faster straight leg raise and knee flexion gains, and fewer wound healing disturbances. We recommend TKA sans tourniquet. Let it bleed!

The major benefit of TKA with tourniquet is operating in a bloodless field. A possible secondary benefit is a better cement bone interface for fixation.

The disadvantages of tourniquet use for TKA include multiple risk factors both local and systemic - Nerve damage; Altered hemodynamics with limb exsanguinations (15‐20% increase in circulatory volume) and reactive hyperemia with tourniquet release (10% increase in limb size increasing soft tissue tension and secondary pain); Delay in recovery of muscle function; Increased risk of DVT with direct trauma to vessel walls and increased levels of thrombin-antithrombin complexes; A 5.3x greater risk for large venous emboli propagation and transesophageal echogenic particles; Vascular injury with higher risk in atherosclerotic, calcified arteries; Increase in wound healing disturbances.

Our initial experience with TKA without tourniquet was in high risk patients with previous DVT or PE, multiple scarring, or compromised cardiovascular status. We have used this method on all patients for the last eight years. The protocol includes regional anesthesia, incision and approach made with 90-degree knee flexion, meticulous hemostasis, jet lavage and filtered carbon dioxide delivered to dry and prepare bone beds for cementation, application of topical tranexamic acid and routine closure. We have encountered no differences in blood loss or transfusion rates, less postoperative pain, faster straight leg raise and knee flexion gains, and fewer wound healing disturbances. We recommend TKA sans tourniquet. Let it bleed!

During TKA, a surgeon has 4 options: not to use a tourniquet at all, use it from incision to closure, from incision until cementing, and only during cementing. The potential advantages of using a tourniquet are: to reduce blood loss, to have a clear operative field, to facilitate preparation of bony surfaces that are optimal for cementation and longevity of fixation of implants, and to reduce the potential for blood-borne disease transmission through needlestick injuries. Potential disadvantages of tourniquet use have been outlined by the previous speaker. In particular, using a tourniquet from incision until closure has several disadvantages and is generally not a preferred option.

While this paper opposes tourniquetless TKA, it supports using a tourniquet from incision until cementing. We will present in support the findings of our prospective, randomised, double-blind study in patients undergoing cemented, navigated, bilateral simultaneous TKA wherein a tourniquet was used from incision until cementing was complete on one side and compared with the other knee in which a tourniquet was used only during cementing. We compared knee pain, thigh pain, blood loss, hemodynamic changes, functional outcome and complications. We concluded that total knee arthroplasty can be safely and effectively performed with the use of the tourniquet from skin incision until cementing without adverse effects.

There has been ongoing debate for many years on the relative merits of routine tourniquet use while performing a total knee replacement. Interestingly there have been many retrospective reviews and opinion articles on the topic, but little in the way of well powered prospective randomised clinical trials.

Those that dislike the premise of routine tourniquet use usually cite a list of either very rare complications, or theoretical concerns (nerve damage, muscle function, wound healing issues).

Like most debate topics, however, the issue is usually a shade of grey, rather than black and white, if the pro/con arguments are evaluated individually.

1. Blood Loss

There can be little debate that intra-operative blood loss is less with the use of a tourniquet. This has been demonstrated in multiple studies and is clearly intuitively obvious. Interestingly the overall blood loss (intra-op + post-op) may, however, be the same regardless of tourniquet use. Having a dry operative field, however, is important in achieving adequate cement fixation, and if tourniquet use is not employed, an alternative should be.

2. OR time

There is an overwhelming body of literature that supports the understanding that increased OR time directly correlates to increased infection rates in total joint arthroplasty. Proponents of not using a tourniquet will often have alternates to achieving a dry operative field that clearly add time to the procedure – meticulous hemostasis, air delivery systems, etc. This increased OR time may come at the cost of increased infection risk.

There is clearly a need for well-designed randomised clinical trials evaluating the practice of routine tourniquet use in TKA. Any trial done, however, must look critically at factors such as OR time, costs of alternatives, and potential long-term outcome effects.

The major benefit of TKA with tourniquet is operating in a bloodless field. A possible secondary benefit is a better cement bone interface for fixation.

The disadvantages of tourniquet use for TKA include multiple risk factors both local and systemic.

Nerve damage

Our initial experience with TKA without tourniquet was in high risk patients with previous DVT or PE, multiple scarring, or compromised cardiovascular status. We have used this method on all patients for the last eight years. The protocol includes regional anesthesia, incision and approach made with 90-degree knee flexion, meticulous hemostasis, jet lavage and filtered carbon dioxide delivered to dry and prepare bone beds for cementation, application of topical tranexamic acid and routine closure. We have encountered no differences in blood loss or transfusion rates, less post-op pain, faster straight leg raise and knee flexion gains, and fewer wound healing disturbances. We recommend TKA sans tourniquet. Let it bleed!

There has been ongoing debate for many years on the relative merits of routine tourniquet use while performing a total knee replacement. Interestingly there have been many retrospective reviews and opinion articles on the topic, but little in the way of well powered prospective randomised clinical trials.

Those that dislike the premise of routine tourniquet use usually cite a list of either very rare complications, or theoretical concerns (nerve damage, muscle function, wound healing issues).

Like most debate topics however, the issue is usually a shade of grey, rather than black and white, if the pro/con arguments are evaluated individually.

There can be little debate that intraoperative blood loss is less with the use of a tourniquet. This has been demonstrated in multiple studies and is clearly intuitively obvious. Interestingly the overall blood loss (intraop + postop) may however be the same regardless of tourniquet use. Having a dry operative field however is important in achieving adequate cement fixation, and if tourniquet use is not employed, an alternative should be.

There is an overwhelming body of literature that supports the understanding that increased OR time directly correlates to increased infection rates in total joint arthroplasty. Proponents of not using a tourniquet will often have alternates to achieving a dry operative field that clearly add time to the procedure – meticulous hemostasis, air delivery systems, etc. This increased OR time may come at the cost of increased infection risk.

There is clearly a need for well-designed randomised clinical trials evaluating the practice of routine tourniquet use in TKA. Any trial done however must look critically at factors such as OR time, costs of alternatives, and potential long-term outcome effects.

While a tourniquet is traditionally used to obtain a dry field during primary TKA (and is also thought to reduce perioperative blood loss), adverse effects of tourniquet use have been reported. Avoiding routine use of the tourniquet during TKA can minimise certain complications while improving the quality of the early result.

Most studies of TKA with and without tourniquet show little difference in all forms of blood loss except for intraoperative. Some studies even show less overall blood loss in groups without tourniquet use. Modern techniques to minimise intraoperative loss have included topical treatments, systemic medications, as well as a bipolar tissue sealer. Visualisation of bleeding vessels and their management intra-operatively can substantially reduce early post-op hemarthrosis.

Tourniquet use has also been related to post-operative thigh pain. This is a negative aspect of tourniquet use that can interfere with physical therapy and rehabilitation. Occasionally it can be a significant factor in post-op recovery. Data supports the fact that avoiding a tourniquet or at least reducing pressure to the minimum necessary may help to reduce post-operative thigh pain.

Ischemia and tissue damage can affect neuromuscular function and rehabilitation following TKA. The time necessary to achieve straight leg raising and knee flexion is delayed by tourniquet use during TKA. Compressive nerve injury also may result in secondary effects of denervation on distal tissues. This denervation can delay recovery of blood flow and increase vessel spasm, hemorrhage and edema. The degree of dysfunction is related to the magnitude of tourniquet compression.

Tension in the lateral retinaculum is directly affected by tourniquet use. Observations from these studies would indicate that lateral release should be performed only if found necessary after tourniquet deflation in order to minimise the potential morbidity that accompanies this procedure.

Although thromboembolic events can occur during TKA without, tourniquet use is associated with more frequent events when it is used.

Finally, it is prudent to avoid the use of a tourniquet in patients with vascular calcifications around the knee or abdomen due to advanced arteriosclerosis, previous bypass grafts, or reduced limb or tissue blood supply for any reason. Routine TKA with minimal tourniquet use greatly simplifies its performance in those settings where it is contra-indicated.

Total knee arthroplasty is an operation that can be performed with or without the use of tourniquet. Two systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the available literature have demonstrated that the use of tourniquet leads to a reduction in blood loss and also shortens the operative time. The opponents for use of tourniquet cite development of complications such as skin bruising, neurovascular injury, and metabolic disturbances as a deterrent for the use of tourniquet. Although the latter may be true for some patients such as those with previous vascular grafts, there is little evidence that routine use of tourniquet during TKA results in any of the above complications. The use of tourniquet on the other hand provides a bloodless field that allows the surgeon to perform the procedure with expediency and optimised visualisation. Blood conservation has gained extreme importance in recent years because of increased understanding of problems associated with blood transfusion such as increased surgical site infection (due to immunomodulation effect), increased length of hospital stay, increased cost and so on. Based on our understanding of the available evidence, we believe that routine use of tourniquet during TKA is justified and a good surgical practice.

While a tourniquet is traditionally used to obtain a dry field during primary TKA (and is also thought to reduce peri-operative blood loss), adverse effects of tourniquet use have been reported. Avoiding routine use of the tourniquet during TKA can minimise certain complications while improving the quality of the early result.

Most studies of TKA with and without tourniquet show little difference in all forms of blood loss except for intra-operative. Some studies even show less overall blood loss in groups without tourniquet use. Modern techniques to minimise intra-operative loss have included topical treatments, systemic medications, as well as a bipolar tissue sealer. Visualisation of bleeding vessels and their management intra-operatively can substantially reduce early post-op hemarthrosis.

Tourniquet use has also been related to post-operative thigh pain. This is a negative aspect of tourniquet use that can interfere with physical therapy and rehabilitation. Occasionally it can be a significant factor in post-op recovery. Data supports the fact that avoiding a tourniquet or at least reducing pressure to the minimum necessary may help to reduce post-operative thigh pain.

Ischemia and tissue damage can affect neuromuscular function and rehabilitation following TKA. The time necessary to achieve straight leg raising and knee flexion is delayed by tourniquet use during TKA. Compressive nerve injury also may result in secondary effects of denervation on distal tissues. This denervation can delay recovery of blood flow and increase vessel spasm, hemorrhage and edema. The degree of dysfunction is related to the magnitude of tourniquet compression.

Tension in the lateral retinaculum is directly affected by tourniquet use. Observations from these studies would indicate that lateral release should be performed only if found necessary after tourniquet deflation in order to minimise the potential morbidity that accompanies this procedure.

Although thrombo-embolic events can occur during TKA without, tourniquet use is associated with more frequent events when it is used.

Finally, it is prudent to avoid the use of a tourniquet in patients with vascular calcifications around the knee or abdomen due to advanced arteriosclerosis, previous bypass grafts, or reduced limb or tissue blood supply for any reason. Routine TKA with minimal tourniquet use greatly simplifies its performance in those settings where it is contra-indicated.

Abstract. Introduction. Neck of femur (NOF) fracture patients are at risk of developing venous thromboembolisms (VTE). VTE risks could be reduced by adhering to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendation for 1 month of prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin. This audit aimed to assess and improve local compliance to national guidelines on VTE prophylaxis in NOF fracture patients following discharge. Methods. A retrospective consecutive case series of all NOF fractures treated at our institution from May – July 2021 was conducted. Those not eligible for outpatient VTE prophylaxis were excluded (anticoagulated for other indications, completed prophylactic course in hospital, inpatient death, pharmacological prophylaxis contraindicated). The agent and duration of VTE prophylaxis, and the occurrence of clinically significant VTE or bleeds were recorded. A re-audit was conducted in March 2022. Results. From May – July 2021, only 1/65 (1.5%) patient was discharged on a VTE prophylaxis regime consistent with NICE guidelines (1 enoxaparin, 56 rivaroxaban, 6 apixaban; 58 35-day course, 5 28-day course). A quick-guide document summarising the standard inpatient and outpatient VTE prophylaxis regimes for various orthopaedic indications was designed and widely disseminated. In March 2022, 30/34 (88.2%) patients were discharged with enoxaparin and 24/34 (70.6%) received a 28-day course. There were no cases of clinically significant VTE or bleeds in both cycles. Conclusion. Local compliance to national guidelines improved significantly with the implementation of a standardised VTE prophylaxis protocol. Our quick-guide document is a reproducible way of communicating consensus and ensuring consistency within a department

The risk of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) is high in orthopaedics. Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors have been introduced to help reduce the incidence of VTE. To reduce post-operative bleeding antifibrinolytics are used. We aimed to ascertain the effect of two drugs on post-operative bleeding and transfusion requirements. We prospectively recorded patient demographics, operative details, complications, transfusion incidence and VTE incidence in TKR patients. We also sent out a questionnaire to patients asking about wound bleeding and VTE. All patients were given 10mg Rivaroxaban 8 hours post operatively and then once a day for 14 days. Patients given tranexamic acid were given 500mg IV, 5 minutes prior to wound closure at the discretion of the surgeon. VTE was confirmed by Doppler or CTPA as Deep Vein Thrombus or Pulmonary Embolism. Minor bleed was categorised as dressing soakage or reported wound leakage, major bleed as haematoma requiring revision within 30 days. 509 patients underwent TKR: 200(39%) only received Rivaroxaban (Group 1), 296(58%) also received tranexamic acid (Group 2). 13(3%) of patients had no data available. 5 patients had a VTE: 4 (2%) Group 1, 1 (0.3%) Group 2 (P<0.05). 39 patients had a minor bleed: 17 (8.5%) Group 1, 22 (7.4%) Group 2 (P=0.5). 2 patients had major bleeds: 1 (0.5%) Group 1, 1 (0.33%) Group 2 (P=0.69). Blood transfusions 21: (10.5%)Group 1, 9 (3%) Group 2 (P<0.0001). We have demonstrated a reduced requirement for blood transfusions in the tranexamic acid group. However our results whilst they show a trend towards decrease bleeding rates in both the minor and major bleeds are not significant, requiring larger studies looking at wound bleeding and leakage

Juvenile Osteochondritis dissecans (JOCD) in humans and subchondral cystic lesions (SCL) in horses (also termed radiolucencies) share similarities: they develop in skeletally immature individuals at the same location in the medial femoral condyle (MFC) and their etiology is only partially understood but trauma is suspected to be involved. JOCD is relatively uncommon in people whereas SCLs arise in 6% of young horses leading to lameness. Ischemic chondronecrosis is speculated to have a role in both osteochondrosis and SCL pathogenesis. We hypothesize that MFC radiolucencies develop very early in life following a focal internal trauma to the osteochondral junction. Our aims were to characterize early MFC radioluciencies in foals from 0 to 2 years old. Distal femurs (n=182) from Thoroughbred horses (n=91, 0–2 years old), presented for post-mortem examination for reasons unrelated to this study, were collected. Radiographs and clinical tomodensitometry were performed to identify lesions defined as a focal delay of ossification. Micro-tomodensitometry (m-CT) and histology was then performed on the MFCs (CT lesions and age-matched subset of controls). Images were constructed in 3D. The thawed condyles, following fixation, were sectioned within the region of interest, determined by CT lesion sites. Hematoxylin eosin phloxin and safran (HEPS) and Martius-Scarlet-Blue (MSB) stains were performed. Histological parameters assessed included presence of chondronecrosis, fibrin, fibroplasia and osteochondral fracture. An additional subset of CT control (lesion-free) MFCs (less 6 months old) were studied to identify early chondronecrosis lesions distant from the osteochondral junction. One MFC in clinical CT triages controls had a small lesion on m-CT and was placed in the lesion group. All m-CT and histologic lesions (n=23) had a focal delay of ossification located in the same site, a weight bearing area on craniomedial condyle. The youngest specimen with lesions was less than 2 months old. On m-CT 3D image analysis, the lesions seemed to progressively move in a craniolateral to caudomedial direction with advancing age and development. Seventy-four percent (n=17/23) of the lesions had bone-cartilage separation (considered to be osteochondral fractures) confirmed by the identification of fibrin/clot on MSB stains, representing an acute focal bleed. Fibroplasia, indicating chronicity, was also identified (74%, n=17/23). In four cases, the chondrocytes in the adjacent cartilage were healthy and no chondronecrosis was identified in any sections in the lesions. Nineteen cases had chondronecrosis and always on the surface adjacent to the bone, at the osteochondral junction. None of the subset of control specimens, less than 6 months old (n=44), had chondronecrosis within the growth cartilage. Early subchondral cystic lesions of the medial femoral condyle may arise secondary to focal internal trauma at the osteochondral junction. The presence of fibrin/clot is compatible with a recent focal bleed in the lesion. Medial femorotibial joint internal forces related to geometry could be the cause of repetitive trauma and lesion progression. In the juvenile horse, and potentially humans, the early diagnosis of MFC lesions and rest during the susceptible period may reduce progression and promote healing by prevention of repetitive trauma, but requires further study

The risk of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) is high in orthopedics. Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors have been introduced to help reduce the incidence of VTE. To reduce post-operative bleeding antifibrinolytics are used. We aimed to ascertain the effect of two drugs on post operative bleeding and transfusion requirements. We prospectively recorded patient demographics, operative details, complications, transfusion incidence and VTE incidence in TKR patients. We also sent out questionnaires to patients asking about wound bleeding and VTE. All patients were given 10mg Rivaroxaban 8 hours post operatively and then OD for 14 or 35 days. Patients given tranexamic acid were given 500mg IV, 5 minutes prior to wound closure at the discretion of the surgeon. VTE was Deep Vein Thrombus or Pulmonary Embolism confirmed by Doppler or CTPA. Minor bleed was categorized as dressing soakage or reported wound leakage, major bleed as hematoma requiring revision within 30 days. 509 patients underwent TKR: 200 (39%) received Rivaroxaban only (Group 1), 296 (58%) also received tranexamic acid (Group 2). 13 (3%) patients had no data available. Five patients had a VTE: 4 (2%) in Group 1, 1 (0.3%) in Group 2 [P<0.05]. 39 patients had a minor bleed: 17 (8.5%) in Group 1, 22 (7.4%) in Group 2 [P=0.5]. 2 patients had major bleeds: 1(0.5%) in Group 1 and 1(0.33%) in Group 2 [P=0.69]. There were 30 blood transfusions: 21 (10.5%) in Group 1, 9 (3%) in Group 2 [P<0.0001]. We have demonstrated a reduced requirement for blood transfusions in the tranexamic acid group. However our results, whilst they show a trend towards decreased minor and major bleeding rates, are not significant and require larger studies looking at wound bleeding and leakage

Purpose of the Study:. Spontaneous intraarticular haemorrhages are the most frequent bleeding episodes encountered in the haemophiliac population, causing pain, joint deformity and arthropathy. Chronic haemophiliac arthropathy is characterised by persistent joint swelling, proliferative synovitis, and damage to or loss of articular cartilage. Elimination of the synovitis is the key to prevention of recurrent intraarticular haemorrhages and joint damage. The purpose of the study was to investigate the indications for, and outcome of, radioactive synoviorthesis for haemophiliac arthropathy. Methods:. A retrospective study was done to assess the results of 12 intra-articular injections of radioactive Yttrium-90 colloid, performed in 10 patients from November 1993 to December 2006. Patients were referred by the Haematology Unit if they had a target joint, as defined as >2 bleeds into the same joint in the preceding 6 months. Follow up was conducted at 6 monthly intervals, assessing clinical and radiological outcomes. The radiological involvement of the target joint, the pre- and post-treatment range of movement, presence of synovitis and bleeding events were compared from presentation to that at follow up. Range of movement of each target joint was assessed and compared to that at follow-up. Results:. The average age at time of injection was 10.6 years (range 6–15). The duration of follow-up was 35 months (range 6 to 60 months). The involved joints had an average of 2 bleeds each in the 6 months preceding the injection (24 events). Following Yttrium injection only 1 out of 12 joints had a bleed in the subsequent 6 months (1 event). Synovitis of the target joint resolved in 11 of 12 joints. Nine target joints (75%) showed a favourable improvement in range of movement. Those with a favourable radiological score had a better clinical outcome, but even those with a poor score showed improvement. Conclusion:. In this study, intra-articular injection of radioactive Yttrium-90 colloid was shown to:. –. Significantly reduce bleeding events in a Haemophiliac cohort. –. Resolve synovitis in 11 out of 12 joints with haemophiliac arthropathy. –. Improve range of movement in the majority of patients. –. This was best in those with a better radiological appearance at presentation. –. Those with a poorer radiological grade also showed some improvement suggesting that while results are less certain, patients may still benefit from the intervention

Background. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Effectiveness recommends both low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and Rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolic (VTE) prophylaxis following lower limb arthroplasty. Despite evidence in the literature that suggests Rivaroxaban reduces VTE events, there are emerging concerns from the orthopaedic community regarding an increase in wound complications following its use. Methods. Through the orthopaedic clinical directors forum, Trusts replacing LMWH with Rivaroxaban for lower limb arthroplasty thromboprophylaxis during 2009 were identified. Prospectively collected Hospital episode statistics (HES) data was then analysed for these units so as to determine rates of 90-day symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), major bleed (cerebrovascular accident or gastrointestinal haemorrhage), all-cause mortality, and 30-day wound infection and readmission rates before and after the change to Rivaroxaban. 2752 patients prescribed Rivaroxaban following TKR or THR were compared to 10358 patients prescribed LMWH. Data was analysed using odds ratios (OR). Results. There were significantly more wound infections in the Rivaroxaban group (3.85% vs. 2.81%, OR=0.72; 95% CI 0.58–0.90). There were no significant differences between the two groups for PE (OR=1.52; 0.77–2.97), major bleed (OR=0.73; 0.48–1.12), all-cause mortality (OR=0.93; 0.46–1.87) and re-admission rate (OR=1.21; 0.88–1.67). There were significantly fewer symptomatic DVTs in the Rivaroxaban group (0.91% vs. 0.36%, OR=2.51; 1.30–4.82). Discussion. This study is the first to describe the real impact of the use of Rivaroxaban in the NHS. When compared with LMWH in lower limb arthroplasty patients, there were fewer DVTs in the Rivaroxaban group. However, wound infection rates were significantly higher following Rivaroxaban use whilst providing no reduction in symptomatic PE or all-cause mortality

Aims

The standard of wide tumour-like resection for chronic osteomyelitis (COM) has been challenged recently by adequate debridement. This paper reviews the evolution of surgical debridement for long bone COM, and presents the outcome of adequate debridement in a tertiary bone infection unit.