Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_31 | Pages 64 - 64
1 Aug 2013
Middleton RG Uzoigwe CE Young PS Smith R Gosal HS Holt G
Full Access

The surgical treatment options for patients who have sustained an intra-capsular hip fracture can vary depending on a number of patient and fracture related factors. Currently most national guidelines support the use of cemented prostheses for patient undergoing hemiarthroplasty surgery. Uncemented prostheses are commonly used for a variety of indications including those patients who have significant medical co-morbidities. To determine whether cemented hemiarthroplasty is associated with a higher post operative mortality when compared to uncemented procedures. Data were extracted from the Scottish SMR01 database from 01/04/1997 from all patients who were admitted to hospital after sustaining a hip fracture. We investigated mortality at day 1,2,4,7,30, 120 and 1 year from surgery vs. that on day 0. In order to control for the effects of confounding variables between patients cohorts, 12 case-mix variable were used to construct a multivariable logistic regression analysis model to determine the independent effect of prosthesis design. There were 52283 patients included in the study. Mortality for osteosynthesis of extra-capsular fractures was consistently lower when compared to that for surgical procedures for intra-capsular fractures. At day 0, uncemented hemiarthroplasty had a lower associated mortality (p<0.001) when compared to cemented implant designs. However, this increased mortality was equal to 1 extra death per 2000 procedures. From day 1 onward mortality for cemented procedures was equal to or lower than that of uncemented. By day 4, cumulative mortality was less for cemented than for uncemented procedures. Complication and re-operation rate was significantly higher in the uncemented cohort. The use of uncemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of intra-capsular hip fractures cannot be justified in terms of early/late post-operative mortality


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_31 | Pages 37 - 37
1 Aug 2013
Leitch A Joseph J Murray H McMillan T Meek R
Full Access

Over 70,000 hip fractures occur annually in the UK. Both SIGN (111) and NICE (124) give guidance on optimal management of these patients. Both suggest cemented hemiarthroplasty should be used in those without contra-indications, as cemented implants are associated with less thigh pain, subsidence and a better functional outcome. Cardiorespiratory compromise secondary to bone cement implantation syndrome (BCIS) is however a concern in those with pre-existing cardiorespiratory disease (NYHA grade 3–4, pulmonary hypertension) or pathological fracture [3]. The aim of our study was to audit the practice of a University of Glasgow hospital with regard to cemented hemiarthroplasty. We retrospectively reviewed data on all patients treated with hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture at the Southern General Hospital between 01/01/12-02/04/12. Patient demographics, pre-operative plan, procedure performed, ASA grade and pre-morbid mobility were recorded. Results. Twenty-three hemiarthroplasties were performed. The median age was 82 (70–101). No patient aged over 90 underwent cemented hemiarthroplasty. Cemented implants (JRI, Furlong) were used in 26% (n=6) while 74% (n=17) underwent uncemented (Stryker, Austin-Moore) hemiarthroplasty. ASA grade was recorded in eight (35%). There were four ASA-2 patients (mild systemic disease not limiting activity) of which 75% underwent uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Pre-morbid mobility was recorded in eight (35%). All three independently mobile patients underwent uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Six (26%) had a documented pre-operative plan with regards to cement use. This study highlights the disparity between current recommendations and our Centres’ practice. Most notable were: poor recording of pre-operative mobility, poor documentation of a pre-operative surgical plan, the low use of cemented fixation even in fit mobile patients and the lack of ASA grade recording (stratification of risk) by our anaesthetic colleagues. We suggest a documented pre-operative discussion between the surgeon and anaesthetist to establish BCIS risk and decide on use of cemented arthroplasty taking into account age and mobility


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_30 | Pages 38 - 38
1 Aug 2013
Baird E Spence S Ayana G
Full Access

Displaced fractures of the neck of femur are routinely treated in the elderly by either cemented hemiarthoplasty, in the fit, or uncemented hemiarthroplasty, in the less fit. In Scotland the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidelines are followed to identify which patients should have a cemented prosthesis. This is based on cardiovascular status, and the age and fragility of the patient. An uncemented prosthesis should be a final operation. A peri-prosthetic fracture is considered a failure of treatment as the patient then has to undergo an operation with a far greater surgical insult. We looked at all neck of femur fractures over a period of Jan 2007 to June 2010. The number of the peri-prosthetic fractures for uncemented hip hemiarthroplasties was established, and a case note review was carried out. There was 1397 neck of femur fractures. 546 hemiarthroplasties were carried out, of which 183 were cemented, and 363 uncemented. 15 patients (4% of uncemented hemiarthoplasties) had peri-prosthetic fractures. There were no peri-prosthetic fractures in the cemented group, p = 0.004 using Fisher's exact test. The case notes of these patients were analysed. We found there was a common link of significant cardiovascular risk, lack of falls assessment (only 14% of the patients had a completed falls assessment and 21% sustained their fracture during an admission to hospital) and confusion (50% had a degree of dementia that caused significant confusion). Cemented implants should be considered in all patients, especially those who are cognitively impaired or have failed falls assessments; even if the cardiovascular risk is significant. This decision should be made in conjunction with a senior anaesthetist. This is being implemented in our unit and a prospective audit is being carried out over the same time period (July 2010 to Dec 2013) to assess the benefit


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXVIII | Pages 41 - 41
1 Jun 2012
Baird E Spence S Ayana G
Full Access

Displaced fractures of the neck of femur are routinely treated in the elderly by either cemented hemiarthoplasty, in the fit, or uncemented hemiarthroplasty, in the less fit. In Scotland the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidelines are followed to identify which patients should have a cemented prosthesis. This is based on cardiovascular status, and the age and fragility of the patient. An uncemeted prosthesis should be a final operation. A peri-prosthetic fracture is considered a failure of treatment as the patient then has to undergo an operation with a far greater surgical insult. We looked at all neck of femur fractures over a period of Jan 2007 to June 2010. The number of the peri-prosthetic fractures for uncemented hip hemiarthroplasties was established and a case note review carried out. There were 397 neck of femur fractures. 546 hemiarthroplasties were carried out, of which 183 were cemented, and 363 uncemented. 14 patients (4% of uncemented arthoplasties) had peri-prosthetic fractures. The case notes of these patients were analysed. There was a common link of significant cardiovascular risk, lack of falls assessment, and confusion. Cemented implants should be considered in those who have failed falls assessment, or are confused; even if the cardiovascular risk is significant. This decision should be made in conjunction with a senior anaethetist. This is being implemented in our unit and a prospective audit is being carried out over the same time period (July 2010 to Dec 2013) to assess the benefit


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 11, Issue 3 | Pages 46 - 47
1 Jun 2022
Das A