Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate surgeons’ reported change of treatment preference in response to the results and conclusion from a randomized contolled trial (RCT) and to study patterns of change between subspecialties and nationalities.

Aims

Hip fractures pose a significant burden on the healthcare system. Hyperglycaemia and a state of Type 2 diabetes exists post operatively. Being normoglycaemic has well documented benefits. Pre operative carbohydrate loading has been shown to have two good effects. It decrease hyperglycaemia post operatively and allows the patient to undergo less strict fasting protocols. Insulin resistance to date has not been examined in these patients and this was determined using a validated formula (HOMA/IR).

Purpose of study

This RCT is to determine whether or not there is a clinical benefit from inserting a dynamic stabilising implant such as the Wallis ligament on the functional recovery of patients who have undergone lumbar decompression surgery. This Interspinous implant was developed as an anatomically conserving procedure without recourse to lumbar spinal fusion surgery. The biomechanical studies have shown that unloading the disc and facet joints reduces intradiscal pressures at same and adjacent levels. The aim of this study was to identify a patential Wallis affect.

Previously, we conducted a multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without remplissage. The end point for the randomized controlled trial was two years post-operative, providing support for the benefits of remplissage in the short term in reducing recurrent instability. The aim of this study was to compare the medium term (3 to 9 years) outcomes of patients previously randomized to have undergone isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) or Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) for the management of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. The rate of recurrent instability and instances of re-operation were examined. The original study was a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with two 1:1 parallel groups with recruitment undertaken between 2011 and 2017. For this medium-term study, participants were reached for a telephone follow-up in 2020 and asked a series of standardized questions regarding ensuing instances of subluxation, dislocation or reoperation that had occurred on their shoulder for which they were randomized. Descriptive statistics were generated for all variables. “Failure” was defined as occurrence of a dislocation. “Recurrent instability” was defined as the participant reporting a dislocation or two or more occurences of subluxation greater than one year post-operative. All analyses were undertaken based on intention-to-treat whereby their data was analyzed based on the group to which they were originally allocated. One-hundred and eight participants were randomized of which 50 in the NO REMP group and 52 in the REMP group were included in the analyses in the original study. The mean number of months from surgery to final follow-up was 49.3 for the NO REMP group and 53.8 for the REMP group. The rates of re-dislocation or failure were 8% (4/52) in the REMP group at an average of 23.8 months post-operative versus 22% (11/50) in the NO REMP at an average of 16.5 months post-operative. The rates of recurrent instability were 10% (5/52) in the REMP group at an average of 24 months post-operative versus 30% (15/50) in the NO REMP group at an average of 19.5 months post-operative. Survival curves were significantly different favouring REMP in both scenarios. Arthroscopic Bankart repair combined with remplissage is an effective procedure in the treatment of patients with an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion and minimal glenoid bone loss (<15%). Patients can expect favourable rates of recurrent instability when compared with isolated Bankart repair at medium term follw-up

Aims. Early large treatment effects can arise in small studies, which lessen as more data accumulate. This study aimed to retrospectively examine whether early treatment effects occurred for two multicentre orthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and explore biases related to this. Methods. Included RCTs were ProFHER (PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation), a two-arm study of surgery versus non-surgical treatment for proximal humerus fractures, and UK FROST (United Kingdom Frozen Shoulder Trial), a three-arm study of two surgical and one non-surgical treatment for frozen shoulder. To determine whether early treatment effects were present, the primary outcome of Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) was compared on forest plots for: the chief investigator’s (CI) site to the remaining sites, the first five sites opened to the other sites, and patients grouped in quintiles by randomization date. Potential for bias was assessed by comparing mean age and proportion of patients with indicators of poor outcome between included and excluded/non-consenting participants. Results. No bias in treatment effect was observed overall for the CI site, or the first five sites, compared with the remaining sites in either trial. An early treatment effect on the OSS was observed for the first quintile of participants recruited to ProFHER only (clinically relevant difference of seven points). Selection bias for age was observed in the ProFHER trial only, with slightly younger patients being recruited into the study. Both trials showed some selection bias for markers of poor prognosis, although these did not appear to change over time. Conclusion. No bias in treatment effects overall were found at the CI or early sites set-up. An early treatment effect was found in one of the two trials, which was likely a chance effect as this did not continue during the study. Selection bias was observed in both RCTs, however this was minimal and did not impact on outcome. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(2):96–103

Worldwide, it is expected that 6.3 million patients will sustain a hip fracture in 2050. Hemiarthroplasty is commonly practiced for displaced femoral neck fractures. The choice between unipolar (UH) or bipolar (BH) hemiarthroplasty is still controversial. The objective of this study was to assess the effect on hip function of BH compared to UH for a displaced femoral neck fracture in elderly patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing BH to UH. Data sources were Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. All data was pooled in Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 software. Selection of the studies included, data abstraction, data synthesis, risk of biais and quality of evidence evaluation was done independently by two authors. Our primary outcome was postoperative hip function. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), acetabular erosion and postoperative complications. 13 randomized controlled trials (n=2256) were eligible for the meta-analysis. There was no difference in hip function scores (standardized mean difference of 0.33 [−0.09–0.75, n=864, I. 2. = 87%,]). Patients with bipolar heads had higher Health-Related Quality of Life scores than patients with unipolar heads (mean difference in EQ-5D scores of 0.12 [0.04–0.19, n=550, I. 2. = 44%]). The use of BH decreased the incidence of acetabular erosion (relative risk of 0.37 [0.17–0.83, n=525, I. 2. = 0%]). There was no relative risk difference for mortality, dislocation, revision and infection. Due to the high heterogeneity between the studies included, it is still unclear whether patients undergoing BH have better hip function than patients undergoing UH. Although, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) may be improved. Future research could be conducted to determine whether a BH offers a better quality of life than UH to geriatric patients undergoing surgery. More precise assessment scores could be developed to better evaluate postoperative outcomes

Unstable chest wall injuries have high rates of mortality and morbidity. These injuries can lead to respiratory dysfunction, and are associated with high rates of pneumonia, sepsis, prolonged ICU stays, and increased health care costs. Numerous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with surgical fixation compared to non-operative treatment. However, an adequately powered multi-centre randomized controlled study using modern fixation techniques has been lacking. We present a multi-centred, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing surgical fixation of acute, unstable chest wall injuries with the current standard of non-operative management. Patients aged 16–85 with a flail chest (3 or more consecutive, segmental, displaced rib fractures), or severe deformity of the chest wall, were recruited from multiple trauma centers across North America. Exclusion criteria included: severe pulmonary contusion, severe head trauma, randomization>72 hours from injury, inability to perform surgical fixation within 96 hours from injury (in those randomized to surgery), fractures of the floating ribs, or fractures adjacent to the spine not amendable to surgical fixation. Patients were seen in follow-up for one year. The primary outcome was days free from mechanical ventilation in the first 28 days following injury. Secondary outcomes were days in ICU, rates of pneumonia, sepsis, need for tracheostomy, mortality, general health outcomes, pulmonary function testing, and other complications of treatment. A sample size of 206 was required to detect a difference of 2 ventilator-free days between the two groups, using a 2-tailed alpha error of 0.05 and a power of 0.80. A total of 207 patients were recruited from 15 sites across Canada and USA, from 2011–2018. Ninety-nine patients were randomized to non-operative treatment, and 108 were randomized to surgical fixation. Overall, the mean age was 53 years, and 75% of patients were male, with 25% females. The commonest mechanisms of injury were: motor vehicle collisions (34%), falls (20%), motorcycle collisions (14%), and pedestrian injuries (11%). The mean injury severity score (ISS) at admission was 26, and patients had a mean of 10 rib fractures. Eighty-nine percent of patients had pneumothorax, 76% had haemothorax, and 54% had pulmonary contusion. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of demographics. The final results will be available and presented at the COA meeting in Halifax. This is the largest randomized controlled trial to date, comparing surgical fixation to non-operative treatment of unstable chest wall and flail chest injuries. The results of this study will shed light on the best treatment options for patients with such injuries, help understand outcomes, and guide treatment. The final results will be available and presented at the COA meeting in Halifax

The aim of this study was to investigate surgeons’ reported change of treatment preference in response to the results and conclusion from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and to study patterns of change between subspecialties and nationalities. Two questionnaires were developed through the Delphi process for this cross-sectional survey of surgical preference. The first questionnaire was sent out before the publication of a RCT and the second questionnaire was sent out after publication. The RCT investigated repair or non-repair of the pronator quadratus (PQ) muscle during volar locked plating of distal radial fractures (DRFs). Overall, 380 orthopaedic surgeons were invited to participate in the first questionnaire, of whom 115 replied. One hundred surgeons were invited to participate in the second questionnaire. The primary outcome was the proportion of surgeons for whom a treatment change was warranted, who then reported a change of treatment preference following the RCT. Secondary outcomes included the reasons for repair or non-repair, reasons for and against following the RCT results, and difference of preferred treatment of the PQ muscle between surgeons of different nationalities, qualifications, years of training, and number of procedures performed per year. Of the 100 surgeons invited for the second questionnaire, 74 replied. For the primary outcome, 6 of 32 surgeons (19%), who usually repaired the PQ muscle and therefore a change of treatment preference was warranted, reported a change of treatment preference based on the RCT publication. Of the secondary outcomes, restoring anatomy was the most common response for repairing the PQ muscle. The majority of the orthopaedic surgeons, where a change of treatment preference was warranted based on the results and conclusion of a RCT, did not report willingness to change their treatment preference

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common and the indication for surgical treatment remain controversial in patients higher than 60 years old. The purpose of the study was to review and analyze the current evidence-based literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines in order to evaluate the efficacy of volar locking plating (VLP) and conservative treatment in DRF in patients over 60 years old. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of science and Clinical Trial.gov were searched from inception to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Relevant article reference lists were also passed over. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data. Main outcomes included functional status: wrist range of motion, validated scores and grip strength. Secondary outcomes include post-operative complications and radiologic assessment. From 3009 screened citations, 5 trials (539 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All trials of this random effect meta-analysis were at moderate risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Differences in the DASH score (MD −5,91; 95% CI, −8,83; −3,00), PRWE score (MD −9.07; 95% CI, −14.57, −3.57) and grip strength (MD 5,12; 95% CI, 0,59-9,65) were statistically significant and favored VLPs. No effect was observed in terms of range of motion. Adverse events are frequent in both treatment groups, reoperation rate is higher in the VLP group. VLP may provide better functional outcomes in patients higher than 60 years old. More RCT are still needed to evaluate if the risks and complications of VLP outweigh the benefits

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common and the indication for surgical treatment remain controversial in patients higher than 60 years old. The purpose of the study was to review and analyze the current evidence-based literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines in order to evaluate the efficacy of volar locking plating (VLP) and conservative treatment in DRF in patients over 60 years old. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of science and Clinical Trial.gov were searched from inception to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Relevant article reference lists were also passed over. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data. Main outcomes included functional status: wrist range of motion, validated scores and grip strength. Secondary outcomes include post-operative complications and radiologic assessment. From 3009 screened citations, 5 trials (539 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All trials of this random effect meta-analysis were at moderate risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Differences in the DASH score (MD −5,91; 95% CI, −8,83; −3,00), PRWE score (MD −9.07; 95% CI, −14.57, −3.57) and grip strength (MD 5,12; 95% CI, 0,59-9,65) were statistically significant and favored VLPs. No effect was observed in terms of range of motion. Adverse events are frequent in both treatment groups, reoperation rate is higher in the VLP group. VLP may provide better functional outcomes in patients higher than 60 years old. More RCT are still needed to evaluate if the risks and complications of VLP outweigh the benefits

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) and osteosynthesis-associated infections (OSIs) present significant challenges in trauma and orthopaedic surgery, substantially impacting patient morbidity, mortality, and economic burden. This concern is heightened in patients with pre-existing comorbidities, such as diabetes mellitus, which are not always modifiable at presentation. A novel intraoperative strategy to prevent these infections is the use of Defensive Antibacterial Coating (DAC), a bio-absorbable antibiotic-containing hydrogel applied to implant surfaces at implantation, acting as a physical barrier to prevent infection. The purpose of this study is to assess the use of a commercially available hydrogel (DAC), highlighting its characteristics that make it suitable for managing PJIs and OSIs in orthopaedics and traumatology. Twenty-five patients who underwent complex orthopaedic procedures with intraoperative application of DAC between March 2022 and April 2023 at a single hospital site were included. Post-operative assessment encompassed clinical, laboratory, and radiographic examinations. In this study, 25 patients were included, with a mean age of 70 ± 14.77 years and an average ASA grade of 2.46 ± 0.78. The cohort presented an average Charleston Comorbidity score of 5.45 ± 2.24. The procedures included 8 periprosthetic fractures, 8 foot and ankle surgeries, 5 upper limb surgeries, and 4 elective hip and knee surgeries. Follow-up assessments at 6 weeks and 6 months revealed no evidence of PJI or OSI in any patients, nor were any treatments for PJI or OSI required during the interim period. DAC demonstrated efficacy in preventing infections in high-risk patients undergoing complex orthopaedic procedures. Our findings warrant further investigation into the use of DAC in complex hosts with randomized control trials

Background. Digital injuries are among the most common presentations to the emergency department. In order to sufficiently examine and manage these injuries, adequate, prompt, and predictable anaesthesia is essential. In this trial, we aim to primarily compare the degree of pain and anaesthesia onset time between the two-injection dorsal block technique (TD) and the single-injection volar subcutaneous block technique (SV). Further, we describe the temporal and anatomical effects of both techniques for an accurate delineation of the anesthetized regions. Methods. A single-centre prospective randomized controlled trial involving patients presenting with isolated wounds to the fingers requiring primary repair under local anaesthesia. Patients were randomized to either the SV or TD blocks. The primary outcome was procedure-related pain (Numerical Rating Scale). Further, we assessed the extent of anaesthesia along with the anaesthesia onset time. Results. A total of 100 patients were included in the final analysis, 50 on each arm of the study. The median pain score during injection was significantly higher in patients who received TD block than patients who received SV block (median [interquartile range] = 4 [2.25, 5] vs. 3 [2, 4], respectively, P = 0.006). However, anaesthesia onset time was not statistically different among the groups (P = 0.39). The extent of anaesthesia was more predictable in the dorsal block compared to the volar block. Conclusion. The single-injection volar subcutaneous blocks are less painful with a similar anaesthesia onset time. Injuries presenting in the proximal dorsal region may benefit from the two-injection dorsal blocks, given the anatomical differences and timely anaesthesia of the region

Aims. Orthopaedic infection is a potentially serious complication of elective and emergency trauma and orthopaedic procedures, with a high associated burden of morbidity and cost. Optimization of vitamin D levels has been postulated to be beneficial in the prevention of orthopaedic infection. This study explores the role of vitamin D in orthopaedic infection through a systematic review of available evidence. Methods. A comprehensive search was conducted on databases including Medline and Embase, as well as grey literature such as Google Scholar and The World Health Organization Database. Pooled analysis with weighted means was undertaken. Results. Pooled analysis of four studies including 651 patients found the mean 25(OH)D level to be 50.7 nmol/l with a mean incidence of infection of 70%. There was a paucity of literature exploring prophylactic 25(OH)D supplementation on reducing orthopaedic infection, however, there was evidence of association between low 25(OH)D levels and increased incidence of orthopaedic infection. Conclusion. The results indicate a significant proportion of orthopaedic patients have low 25(OH]D levels, as well as an association between low 25(OH)D levels and orthopaedic infection, but more randomized controlled trials need to be conducted to establish the benefit of prophylactic supplementation and the optimum regimen by dose and time. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):721–727

Perioperative glucocorticoids have been used as a successful non-opioid analgesic adjunct for various orthopaedic procedures. Here we describe an ongoing randomized control trial assessing the efficacy of a post-operative methylprednisolone taper course on immediate post-operative pain and function following surgical distal radius fixation. We hypothesize that a post-operative methylprednisolone taper course following distal radius fracture fixation will lead to improved patient pain and function. This study is a randomized control trial (NCT03661645) of a group of patients treated surgically for distal radius fractures. Patients were randomly assigned at the time of surgery to receive intraoperative dexamethasone only or intraoperative dexamethasone followed by a 6-day oral methylprednisolone (Medrol) taper course. All patients received the same standardized perioperative pain management protocol. A pain journal was used to record visual analog pain scores (VAS-pain), VAS-nausea, and number of opioid tablets consumed during the first 7 post-operative days (POD). Patients were seen at 2-weeks, 6-weeks, and 12-weeks post-operatively for clinical evaluation and collection of patient reported outcomes (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score [qDASH]). Differences in categorical variables were assessed with χ2 or Fischer's exact tests. T-tests or Mann-Whitney-U tests were used to compare continuous data. Forty-three patients were enrolled from October 2018 to October 2019. 20 patients have been assigned to the control group and 23 patients have been assigned to the treatment group. There were no differences in age (p=0.7259), Body Mass Index (p=0.361), race (p=0.5605), smoking status (p=0.0844), or pre-operative narcotic use (p=0.2276) between cohorts. 83.7% (n=36) of patients were female and the median age was 56.9 years. No differences were seen in pre-operative qDASH (p=0.2359) or pre-operative PRWE (p=0.2329) between groups. In the 7 days following surgery, patients in the control group took an average of 16.3 (±12.02) opioid tablets, while those in the treatment group took an average of 8.71 (±7.61) tablets (p=0.0270). We see that significant difference in Opioid consumption is formed at postoperative day two between the two groups with patients in the control group taking. Patient pain scores decreased uniformly in both groups to post-operative day 7. Patient pain was not statistically from POD0 to POD2 (p=0.0662 to 0.2923). However, from POD4 to POD7 patients receiving the methylprednisolone taper course reported decreased pain (p=0.0021 to 0.0497). There was no difference in qDASH score improvement at 6 or 12 weeks. Additionally, no differences were seen for wrist motion improvement at 6 or 12 weeks. A methylprednisolone taper course shows promise in reducing acute pain in the immediate post-operative period following distal radius fixation. Furthermore, although no statistically significant reductions in post-operative opioid utilization were noted, current trends may become statistically significant as the study continues. No improvements were seen in wrist motion or qDASH and continued enrollment of patients in this clinical trial will further elucidate the role of methylprednisolone for these outcomes

Despite the routine use of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, postoperative infection following fracture surgery remains a persistent issue with substantial morbidity. The use of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis may have a protective effect and some orthopaedic surgeons have adopted their use in recent years, despite limited evidence of its beneficial effect. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the current literature regarding the effect of prophylactic local antibiotics on the rate of infection in fracture surgery in both open and closed fractures. A comprehensive search of Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed was performed. Cohort studies were eligible if they investigated the effect on infection rate of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis compared with systemic prophylaxis alone following fracture surgery. The data were pooled in a meta-analysis. In total, four randomized controlled trials and 11 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 6161 fractures from various anatomical locations were eligible for inclusion. The majority of the included studies were Level 3 evidence and had a moderate risk of bias. When all fractures were pooled, the risk of infection was significantly reduced when local antibiotics were applied compared with the control group receiving systemic prophylaxis only (OR = 0.39; 95%CI: 0.26 to 0.53, P < 0.001). In particular, there was a significant reduction in deep infections (OR = 0.59; 95%CI: 0.38 to 0.91, P = 0.017). The beneficial effect of local antibiotics for preventing total infection was seen in both open fractures (OR = 0.35; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.53, P < 0.001) and closed fractures (OR = 0.58; 95%CI: 0.35 to 0.95, P = 0.029) when analyzed separately. This meta-analysis suggests a significant risk reduction for postoperative infection following fracture surgery when local antibiotics were added to standard systemic prophylaxis, with a protective effect present in both open and closed fractures

Aim. In 10% of the presumed aseptic hip or knee revisions, a low-grade infection is unexpectedly diagnosed based on the tissue samples taken during revision. Extended antimicrobial prophylaxis can possibly reduce the failure rate in cases of unexpected PJI, because the prophylaxis can be considered as early empiric treatment. In this randomized controlled study we analysed whether extended antimicrobial prophylaxis compared to a single dose is beneficial to improve the outcome of treatment in unexpected PJI in revision arthroplasty. Method. This study was nested in a randomized clinical trial comparing single-dose cefazolin with prolonged prophylaxis (15 doses of cefazolin over 5 days) for revision arthroplasty of the hip or knee. For this analysis, patients were included if an unsuspected PJI (defined as ≥2 positive intraoperative tissue samples with the same microorganism) was diagnosed. PJI treatment consisted of 12 weeks of a rifampicin-based regimen in Staphylococcal PJI, without removal of the prosthesis. We examined Infection characteristics and success of treatment after one year, defined as the absence of signs or treatment for PJI during follow-up. Results. After randomization of 662 patients, 68 unexpected PJI were diagnosed. In 5 cases no antimicrobial treatment was started. The success rate after one year follow-up for those who received PJI treatment was 96% (28/29) in the single dose group and 91% (31/34) in the extended prophylaxis group (p=1.00). The most frequently identified pathogens in unexpected PJI were Cutibacterium acnes (n=50) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (n=14). The causatives were susceptible for the cefazolin prophylaxis in 61 of the 63 cases. The interval between the stopped prophylaxis and the re-start of antimicrobial treatment was on average 10 days (SD 4) for the single dose and 5 days (SD 4) for the extended group. The mean duration of antimicrobial treatment was 83 days (SD 12) and did not differ between both groups (p=0.16). Conclusions. This is the first randomized controlled trial in which extended prophylaxis showed no benefit on the prosthesis survival for patients with an unexpected PJI after assumed aseptic revision of the hip or knee prosthesis. The results imply that extended prophylaxis should not be given as part of early empiric therapy

In recent literature, the fragility index (FI) has been used to evaluate the robustness of statistically significant findings of dichotomous outcomes. This metric is defined as the minimum number of outcome events to flip study conclusions from significant to nonsignificant. Orthopaedics literature is frequently found to be fragile with a median FI of 2 in 150 RCTs across spine, hand, sports medicine, trauma and orthopaedic oncology studies. While many papers discuss limitations of FI, we aimed to further characterize it by introducing the Fragility Likelihood (FL), a new metric that allows us to consider the probability of the event to occur and to calculate the likelihood of this fragility to be reached. We systematically reviewed all randomized controlled trials in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Am) over 10 years. The FL was calculated with the following formula: A x B x C x 100% (A= FI; B = probability of the event in the group with the smallest number of events; C= probability of the non-event in the group with the highest number of events). A smaller FL demonstrates more robust results and conversely, a larger FL illustrates a higher likelihood of fragility being reached and more fragile the findings. The median FI for the statistically significant outcomes was 2 (Mean: 3.8; Range 0-23). The median FL for the statistically significant outcomes was 11% (Mean: 22%, Range: 2%-73%). This means that the probability of reaching non-significance is only 11% when considering the probability of the event to occur. When comparing studies with the same FI we found the FL to range from 3% to 43%. This illustrates the large differences in robustness between trials with equal FI when the likelihood of the event was taken into consideration. As orthopaedic studies are frequently reported as fragile, we found that by calculating the FL, studies may be more robust than previously assumed based off FI alone. By using the FL in conjunction with FI and p-values will provide additional insight into the robustness of the reported outcomes. Our results indicate that by calculating the FL, study conclusions are stronger than what the FI alone predicts. Although conducting RCTs in surgery can be challenging, we must endeavor to critically evaluate our results so we can answer important orthopaedic questions with certainty

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

Aim. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication after total joint arthroplasty. To prevent PJI, strict infection prevention measures are followed in combination with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP). To date, scientific reports concerning the optimal duration of SAP in revision arthroplasty are scarce. The aim of this multicenter open-label, randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands, is to investigate the superiority of 5 days (extended) versus a single dose of cefazolin to prevent PJI within the first year after revision arthroplasty of the hip and knee. Method. Included patients with an assumed aseptic hip or knee revision procedure received a single dose of 2 or 3 gram cefazolin preoperatively. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive extended prophylaxis of cefazolin during 5 days postoperatively versus no prophylaxis after wound closure. Patients were excluded if evidence of PJI at revision. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PJI within one year after revision arthroplasty. PJI was defined according to the 2018 Philadelphia consensus criteria. With a sample size of 746 patients, an alpha of 5% and a power of 80%, superiority of the extended regimen would be shown if the lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the absolute between-group difference of the percentage of PJI is below −4%. Results. In total 751 patients were included for analysis: 379 in the single dose cefazolin group and 372 in the extended group. Within one year, PJI occurred in 2.6% (10/379) in the single dose group and 2.4% (9/372) in the extended group (risk difference, −0.2 percentage points; 95% CI, −2.5 to 2.0%), thus superiority was not shown. Adverse drug events were seen in 20 cases with extended and 7 cases with a single dose prophylaxis. Conclusions. Extended prophylaxis is not significantly superior to a single dose of cefazolin to prevent PJI within the first year after revision arthroplasty of the hip or knee. This is the first randomized controlled trail in which the duration of SAP in the selected group of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty was studied. Extending SAP after closure of the wound could increase the selection or induction of antimicrobial resistance, has an increased risk for adverse drug events, and is therefore not in line with the primary goal of antimicrobial stewardship, comprising optimizing clinical outcomes and ensuring cost-effective therapy while minimizing unintended consequences of antimicrobial use

Aim. Rifampicin and fluoroquinolone based therapy is generally considered as first-choice targeted oral antimicrobial therapy for staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections (PJI) treated with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR). Alternative equally effective antimicrobial strategies are urgently needed due to toxicity and drug-drug interactions that frequently occur with this strategy. Data from recent clinical studies suggests equipoise for other antimicrobial treatment regimens. The objective of the Rifampicin Combination Therapy versus Targeted Antimicrobial Monotherapy in the Oral Antimicrobial Treatment Phase of Staphylococcal Prosthetic Joint Infection (RiCOTTA)-trial is to evaluate whether monotherapy with clindamycin is non-inferior to rifampicin/fluoroquinolone combination therapy in patients with staphylococcal PJI that are treated with DAIR. Method. The RiCOTTA-trial is a multicenter, non-inferiority, open-label, randomized controlled trial evaluating clindamycin versus rifampicin/fluoroquinolone combination therapy in the oral treatment phase in patients with staphylococcal PJI managed with DAIR. The trial is performed in 16 hospitals in the Netherlands. Eligible patients are adults with staphylococcal knee or hip PJI managed by DAIR. Patients are included one to six days before antibiotic treatment is switched from intravenous to oral therapy. Patients with a contraindication for rifampicin, with a megaprosthesis or who receive intravenous antibiotics for more than three weeks after initial debridement are excluded. Primary outcome is treatment success one year after finishing antimicrobial treatment. Success is defined as the absence of: i. Infection related re-surgery, ii. New episode of antibiotic treatment for infection of the index joint after the initial treatment phase of 12 weeks, iii. Ongoing use of antibiotics for the index joint at the end of follow-up, iv. Death. The estimated treatment success of rifampicin combination therapy is 85% and the monotherapy strategy is considered not inferior when the difference in treatment success will be less than 10%. Enrolment of 158 patients per group (316 in total) is needed to confirm non-inferiority of monotherapy with a power of 80%. The trial is currently open for enrolment. The study is approved by the Medical Ethics Committee Leiden, the Hague, Delft, the Netherlands and registered under EU trial number 2022-501620-26-00 in Clinical Trial Information System. Conclusions. Currently, the RiCOTTTA study is the largest randomised clinical trial that compares targeted oral monotherapy with rifampicin combination treatment for staphylococcal PJI. Noninferiority of monotherapy would result in a change in national PJI guidelines and enable clinicians to use a more patient-tailored approach when considering antibiotics for patients during the oral treatment phase of PJI