Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 8 of 8
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_8 | Pages 29 - 29
10 May 2024
Stowers M Rahardja R Nicholson L Svirskis D Hannam J Young S
Full Access

Introduction. Day stay surgery for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions is an increasingly common practice and has driven clinicians to come up with postoperative pain regimes that allow same day mobilisation and a safe and timely discharge. There is a paucity of literature surrounding the use of intraosseous (IO) ropivacaine used as a Bier's block to provide both intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in lower limb surgery. Methods. This patient blinded, pilot study randomised 15 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction to receive either IO ropivacaine 1.5 or 2.0 mg/kg; or 300 mg of ropivacaine as local infiltration (standard of care). Toxic plasma levels of ropivacaine have been defined in the literature and therefore the primary outcome for this study was arterial plasma concentration of ropivacaine as a means to determine its safety profile. Samples were taken via an arterial line at prespecified times after tourniquet deflation. Secondary outcomes that we were interested in included immediate postoperative pain scores using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and perioperative opioid equivalent consumption. Results. Participants had a mean age of 27.8 (SD 9.2) years and 87% (13/15) were male. All patients in the intervention group receiving IO ropivacaine had plasma concentrations well below the threshold for central nervous system (CNS) toxicity (0.60 µg/ml). The highest plasma concentration was achieved in the intervention group receiving 1.5 mg/kg dose of ropivacaine reaching 3.59 mg/ml. This would equate to 0.22 µg/ml of free plasma ropivacaine. There were no differences across the three groups regarding pain scores or perioperative opioid consumption. Conclusions. This study demonstrates that IO administration of 0.2% ropivacaine is both safe and effective in reducing perioperative pain in patients undergoing ACL reconstruction. There may be scope to increase the IO dose further or utilise other analgesics via the IO regional route to improve perioperative pain relief


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_12 | Pages 65 - 65
1 Dec 2022
Gazendam A Ayeni OR
Full Access

Orthopaedic surgeons prescribe more opioids than any other surgical speciality. Opioids remain the analgesic of choice following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery. There is growing evidence that opioid-sparing protocols may reduce postoperative opioid consumption while adequately addressing patients’ pain. However, there are a lack of prospective, comparative trials evaluating their effectiveness. The objective of the current randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy of a multi-modal, opioid-sparing approach to postoperative pain management in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder and knee surgery. The NO PAin trial is a pragmatic, definitive RCT (NCT04566250) enrolling 200 adult patients undergoing outpatient shoulder or knee arthroscopy. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to an opioid-sparing group or standard of care. The opioid-sparing group receives a three-pronged prescription package consisting of 1) a non-opioid prescription: naproxen, acetaminophen and pantoprazole, 2) a limited opioid “rescue prescription” of hydromorphone, and 3) a patient education infographic. The control group is the current standard of care as per the treating surgeon, which consists of an opioid analgesic. The primary outcome of interest is oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption up to 6 weeks postoperatively. The secondary outcomes are postoperative pain scores, patient satisfaction, quantity of OMEs prescribed and number of opioid refills. Patients are followed at both 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Data analysts and outcome assessors are blinded to the treatment groups. As of December 1, 2021 we have enrolled 166 patients, reaching 83% of target enrolment. Based on the current recruitment rate, we anticipate that enrolment will be completed by the end of January 2022 with final follow-up and study close out completed by March of 2022. The final results will be released at the Canadian Orthopaedic Association Meeting in June 2022 and be presented as follows. The mean difference in OME consumption was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in OMEs prescribed was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in Visual Analogue Pain Scores (VAS) and patient satisfaction are XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The absolute difference in opioid refills was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The results of the current study will demonstrate whether an opioid sparing approach to postoperative outpatient pain management is effective at reducing opioid consumption while adequately addressing postoperative pain in patients undergoing outpatient shoulder and knee arthroscopy. This study is novel in the field of arthroscopic surgery, and its results will help to guide appropriate postoperative analgesic management following these widely performed procedures


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_13 | Pages 71 - 71
1 Dec 2022
Gazendam A Ekhtiari S Ayeni OR
Full Access

Orthopaedic surgeons prescribe more opioids than any other surgical speciality. Opioids remain the analgesic of choice following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery. There is growing evidence that opioid-sparing protocols may reduce postoperative opioid consumption while adequately addressing patients’ pain. However, there are a lack of prospective, comparative trials evaluating their effectiveness. The objective of the current randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy of a multi-modal, opioid-sparing approach to postoperative pain management in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder and knee surgery. The NO PAin trial is a pragmatic, definitive RCT (NCT04566250) enrolling 200 adult patients undergoing outpatient shoulder or knee arthroscopy. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to an opioid-sparing group or standard of care. The opioid-sparing group receives a three-pronged prescription package consisting of 1) a non-opioid prescription: naproxen, acetaminophen and pantoprazole, 2) a limited opioid “rescue prescription” of hydromorphone, and 3) a patient education infographic. The control group is the current standard of care as per the treating surgeon, which consists of an opioid analgesic. The primary outcome of interest is oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption up to 6 weeks postoperatively. The secondary outcomes are postoperative pain scores, patient satisfaction, quantity of OMEs prescribed and number of opioid refills. Patients are followed at both 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Data analysts and outcome assessors are blinded to the treatment groups. As of December 1, 2021 we have enrolled 166 patients, reaching 83% of target enrolment. Based on the current recruitment rate, we anticipate that enrolment will be completed by the end of January 2022 with final follow-up and study close out completed by March of 2022. The final results will be released at the Canadian Orthopaedic Association Meeting in June 2022 and be presented as follows. The mean difference in OME consumption was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in OMEs prescribed was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in Visual Analogue Pain Scores (VAS) and patient satisfaction are XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The absolute difference in opioid refills was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The results of the current study will demonstrate whether an opioid sparing approach to postoperative outpatient pain management is effective at reducing opioid consumption while adequately addressing postoperative pain in patients undergoing outpatient shoulder and knee arthroscopy. This study is novel in the field of arthroscopic surgery, and its results will help to guide appropriate postoperative analgesic management following these widely performed procedures


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_3 | Pages 8 - 8
1 Mar 2021
Dimnjakovic D
Full Access

A tourniquet is usually used during ankle arthroscopy to allow for improved visibility and reduced operation time. However, clinical studies on knee arthroscopy have not demonstrated this to be true. In addition, Zengerink and van Dijk emphasized a limited tourniquet time in ankle arthroscopy as a possible factor to lower the complication rate even more. The purpose of this prospective randomized controlled trial was to examine the effect of tourniquet use on arthroscopic visualization, operative time, postoperative intra-articular bleeding, postoperative pain scores and outcome of anterior ankle arthroscopy. A consecutive series of 50 patients who were scheduled for anterior ankle arthroscopy were randomized to have the surgery done either without the tourniquet inflated (25 patients) or with the tourniquet inflated (25 patients). The patients were evaluated by the course of the surgery, postoperative intra-articular bleeding, pain during the early postoperative period and by using the subjective and objective functional scores to evaluate the condition of the ankle before and 3 and 6 months after the surgery. The statistical analysis was performed with the normality of distribution tested by both Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. Appropriate parametric or non-parametric methods were then used to test statistical hypotheses, while the statistical significance (alpha, Type I error) was set at .05. Fourty-nine patients were present at the final follow-up, 6 months after the surgery. The results between the groups were comparable regarding the duration of the operative procedure, consumption of sterile saline, visualisation and functional scores. Notable difference between the groups in favour of the non-tourniquet group was present regarding postoperative bleeding, but was not statistically significant. Statistically significant difference in favour of the non-tourniquet group was found regarding postoperative pain during several days in the early postoperative period. Our study has shown that anterior ankle arthroscopy may be performed adequately without the use of a tourniquet and that it has the same operative course as in cases in which the tourniquet is used and functional outcomes which are not worse than in cases in which the tourniquet is used


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 114 - 114
1 Jul 2020
Thompson G Hardesty C Son-Hing J Ina J Tripi P Poe-Kochert C
Full Access

Intrathecal morphine (IM) is a common adjunct in paediatric spinal deformity surgery. We previously demonstrated with idiopathic scoliosis it provides safe and effective analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. This study represents our 25 year experience with IM in all diagnostic groups. Our prospective Pediatric Orthopaedic Spine Database (1993–2018) was reviewed to identify all patients undergoing spinal deformity surgery who received IM and who did not. Patients 21 years of age or less who had a posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with segmental spinal instrumentation (SSI), and received 9–19 mcg/kg (up to 1 mg) of IM were included. Early onset scoliosis surgical patients were excluded. We assessed demographics, pain scores, time to first dose of opioids, diagnoses, surgical time, paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission and IM complications (respiratory depression, pruritus, nausea/ vomiting). There were 986 patients who met inclusion criteria. This included 760 patients who received IM and 226 who did not. IM was not used for short procedures (< 3 hrs), respiratory concerns, unsuccessful access of intrathecal space, paraplegia, and anesthesiologist decision. Both groups followed the same strict perioperative care path. The patients were divided into 5 diagnostic groups (IM / non IM patients): idiopathic (578/28), neuromuscular (100/151), syndromic (36/17), and congenital scoliosis (32/21) and kyphosis (14/9). Females predominated over males (697/289). The first dose of opioids after surgery was delayed for a mean of 10.6 hrs in IM group compared to 2.3 hrs in the non-IM group (p=0.001). The postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the IM groups in the Post Anesthesia Care Unite (p=0.001). Only 17 IM patients (2%) were admitted to the PICU for observation secondary to respiratory depression, none required re-intubation. None of the IM group were re-intubated. Forty-nine patients (6%) experienced pruritus in the IM group compared to 4 of 226 patients (2%) in the non IM group. There were 169 patients (22%) of the IM patients and 21 patients (9%) of the non IM had nausea and vomiting postoperatively. Three patients (0.39%) had a dural leak from the administration of IM but did not require surgical repair. There were no other perioperative complications related to the use of IM. There were no significant group differences. Pre-incision IM is a safe and effective adjunct for pain management in all diagnostic groups undergoing spinal surgery. The IM patients had lower pain scores and a longer time to first administration of post-operative opioids. Although there is an increased frequency of respiratory depression, pruritus, and nausea/vomiting in the IM group, there were no serious complications


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_27 | Pages 4 - 4
1 Jul 2013
Brookes B Jamil W Khunda A Ryan W
Full Access

The use of tourniquet in lower limb orthopaedic surgery is well established, however, it does have associated risks and complications and its use has been previously questioned. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative pain scores, analgesic requirements and time to discharge in patients undergoing tourniquet assisted and non-tourniquet assisted routine knee arthroscopy. A total of 40 patients were randomised to tourniquet assisted and non-tourniquet assisted groups. Arthroscopy was performed using a standardised local anaesthetic infiltration in the non-tourniquet assisted group. All patients completed a postoperative pain score. Findings demonstrated that the incidence and mean scores for postoperative pain were significantly lower in the non-tourniquet group. Additionally postoperative analgesic requirements of patients in the non-tourniquet group were also found to be significantly lower and time spent in recovery and on the ward postoperatively was also lower in the non-tourniquet group compared to the tourniquet group. On the basis of the results in our study we recommend abolishing the use of tourniquet in routine knee arthroscopies in the virgin knee


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XL | Pages 135 - 135
1 Sep 2012
Park SE Kim SK
Full Access

Introduction. Patient demand for a less invasive surgical approach reducing the trauma induced to the joint has resulted in the development of Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS). Although the length of the surgical incision is appealing to patients, the changes are not purely cosmetic. The surgery should not violate the extensor mechanism in any way. Incisions into the quadriceps tendon or into the vastus medialis muscle make the approach less difficult but this violation will slow the recovery and affect the ROM of the knee. In Asian knees, authors found the variation of VMO, which is essential in early functional recovery in TKA patient, is so much, so new clinical test for MIS QS should be needed to show location relationship between the upper pole of the patella and the insertion of VMO itself to avoid unnecessary injury of VMO during TKA. Purpose. The purpose of this comparison study was to verify whether MIS QS TKA can be a more functional and better method in treatment of advanced degenerative arthritis comparing with mini MIS TKA. Methods. Group I: MIS QS group were 50 knees (69.3±9.7 years) and follow up period of that were 28.8± 0.4 months. Group II: mini quad split MIS TKA were 200 knees knees (67.4±5.6 years) and follow up period of that were 34.2± 0.6 months. We did clinical and radiological assessment. Results. The length of incision of group I was 9.32±0.96 cm and that of group II was 10.9±0.5 cm. In clinical assessment, the postoperative pain score of group I was 47.5±2.74 points and that of group II was 47.4±3.27 points. The postoperative knee score of group I was 94.5±5.16 points and that of group II was 93.9±5.94 points. The postoperative knee functional score of group I was 90±8.94 points and that of group II was 93.4±6.73 points. The postoperative range of motion of group I was 122±16.9 degrees and that of group II was 116±23.5 degrees. In radiological assessment, The postoperative tibiofemoral angles of group I was 5±2.6 degrees and that of group II was 5.4±2.7 degrees. The α and β angle of group I was 95±3.5, 88±3.4 degrees and that of group II was 96±2.5, 89±2.4 degrees. The γ and δ angle of group I was 5.17±4.12, 85±1.4 degrees and that of group II was 3.96±3.1, 86±1.8 degrees. Conclusions. There were no significant differences in functions between two groups. Both MIS QS and mini Quad split TKA are an effective and safe method in treatment of advanced degenerative arthritis


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_5 | Pages 17 - 17
1 Mar 2017
Twiggs J Miles B Fritsch B Dickison D Roe J Theodore W
Full Access

Introduction. Recent studies have challenged the concept that a single ‘correct’ alignment to standardised anatomical references is the primary driver of TKA performance with regards to patient satisfaction outcomes. Patient specific variations in musculoskeletal anatomy are one explanation for this. Virtual simulated environments such as rigid body modelling allow for the impact of component alignment and variable patient specific musculoskeletal anatomy to be studied simultaneously. This study aims to determine if the output kinematics derived from consideration of both postoperative component alignment and patient specific musculoskeletal modelling has predictive potential of Patient Reported Outcomes. Method. Landmarking of key anatomical points and 3D registration of implants was performed on 96 segmented post-operative CT scans of TKAs. Both femoral and tibia implant components were registered. Acadaver rig validated platform for generating patient specific rigid body musculoskeletal models was used to assess the resultant motions and contact forces through a 0 to 140 degree deep knee bend cycle. Resultant kinematics were segmented and tested for differentiation with and correlation to a 12 month postoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Results. Significant negative correlations (p<0.05) were found between the postoperative KOOS symptoms score and the rollback occurring in midflexion, quadriceps force in mid flexion, patella shear force and patella tilt at 90 degrees of flexion. A significant positive correlation was found between lateral shit of the patella through flexion and the symptoms score. (p<0.05) When segmenting those KOOS scores performing in the lowest 20% of patients, both rollback and the three patella measurements have statistically significantly different means (t test, p<0.05). There were other trends present that are discernible but do not have linear correlations, as they are cross-dependant on other kinematic factors or are not linear in nature. When segmenting the varus/valgus angular change into those with a varus angular change from extension to full flexion between 0 and 4 degrees (long leg axis, not implant to implant) and those with either further varus change or a valgus change, a statistically significant difference of 7 points (p<0.05) in the postoperative KOOS pain score is observed. Likewise, measured rollback of no more than 6mm without roll forward scored 10 points higher (p<0.05) in the postoperative KOOS score. These two parameters form a ‘kinematic safe zone' of outcomes in which the postoperative KOOS score is 12 points higher (p<0.05). Conclusions. The study showed statistically significant correlations between kinematic factors in a simulation of postoperative TKA and post-operative KOOS scores. The kinematic factors so captured are the result of both the variation in implant position and the subject specific, variable musculoskeletal anatomy. The presence of a ‘kinematic safe zone' in the data suggests a subject specific optimisation target for any given individual patient and the opportunity to preoperatively determine a subject specific implant position target