COVID 19 led to massive disruption of elective services across Scotland. This study was designed to assess the impact on elective service that the COVID-19 pandemic had, to what extent services have been restarted and the associated risks are in doing so.

This is a retrospective observational study. The primary outcomes are the number of operations completed, 30-day mortality, 30-day complication rates and nosocomial infection with COVID-19 compared to previous years. Data was collected from 4 regions across Scotland from 27th March 2020 - 26th March 2021. This was compared to the same time period the previous year.

3431 elective operations were completed in the year post-pandemic compared with 12255, demonstrating a reduction of 72%. Both groups had comparable demographics. Major joint arthroplasty saw a 72% reduction, with TKR seeing a reduction of 82%. Each of the 4 health boards were affected in a similar fashion. Nosocomial COVID-19 infection was 0.4% in the post covid group. 30 day mortality was the same at 0.1%. Total complications rose from 5.7% to 10.1% post covid.

This study shows that there has been a substantial reduction in elective activity across Scotland that is disproportionate to the level of COVID-19. The risk of developing COVID-19 from elective surgery is low at 0.4%, however all complications saw a significant rise. This is likely multifactorial. This study will inform decision makers in future pandemics, that it is safe to continue elective orthopaedic surgery and of the potential impact of cessation of services.

Unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis can be treated with either Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) or Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) and controversy remains as to which treatment is best. UKA has been reported to offer a variety of advantages, however many still see it as a temporary procedure with higher revision rates.

We aimed to clarify the role of UKA and evaluate the long-term and revision outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed the pain, function and total Knee Society Score (KSS) for 602 UKA and 602 TKA in age and gender matched patients over ten years.

The total pre-operative KSS scores were not significantly different between UKA and TKA (42.67 vs 40.54 P=0.021). KSS (pain) was significantly better in the TKA group (44.39 vs 41.38 P= 0.007) at one year and at five years post-operatively (45.33 vs 43.12 P=0.004). There was no statistically significant difference for KSS (total) in TKA and UKA during the study period. 16.3% of UKA and 20.1% of TKA had a documented complication. 79 UKA (13%) and 36 TKA (6%) required revision surgery. Despite the higher revision rate, pre-operative KSS (total) before revision was not significantly different between UKA and TKA (42.94 vs 42.43 P=0.84). Performance for UKAs was inferior to TKAs in Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival analysis at 10 years (P<0.001).

Both UKA and TKA are viable treatment options for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis, each with their own merits. UKA is associated with fewer complications whereas TKA provides better initial pain relief and is more durable and less likely to require revision.

National guidelines recommend that trauma centres have a designated consultant for managing metastatic bone disease (MBD). No such system exists in Scotland. We compared MBD cases in a trauma hospital to a national bone tumour centre to characterise differences in management and outcome.

Consecutive patients with metastatic proximal femoral lesions referred to a trauma unit and a national sarcoma centre were compared over a seven-year period (minimum follow-up one year).

From Jan 2010-Dec 2016, 195 patients were referred to the trauma unit and 68 to the tumour centre. The trauma unit tended to see older patients (mean 72 vs. 65 years, p<0001) with cancers of poorer prognosis (e.g. 31% 61/195 vs. 13% 9/68 lung primary, p<0.001).

Both units had similar operative rates but patients referred to the tumour centre were more likely to have endoprosthetic reconstruction (EPR 44% tumour vs. 3% trauma centre, p<0.001). Patients with an EPR survived longer than those with other types of fixation (81% 17/21 vs. 31% 35/112 one-year survival, p<0.001). Patients undergoing EPR were more likely to have an isolated metastasis (62% 13/21 vs. 17% 4/24, p<0.001). One patient from each centre had a revision for failed metalwork.

There was a difference in caseload referred to both units, with the tumour centre seeing younger patients with a better prognosis. Patients suitable for endoprostheses were more likely to have isolated metastatic disease and a longer survival after surgery. An MBD pathway is required to ensure such patients are identified and referred for specialist management where appropriate.

Two-stage revision is the gold standard for managing infected total hip and knee arthroplasties. The aim was to assess the effect of duration between stages on reinfection rate at one year.

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted on all studies investigating reinfection rate with documented interval between first and second stages. Total hip (THR) and total knee replacements (TKRs) were included but analysed separately. The effect size of studies was stratified according to sample size then with study quality.

All papers up until November 2015 (including non-English language) were considered. From 3827 papers reviewed, 38 cohorts from 35 studies were included, comprising 23 THR and 15 TKR groups. Average study quality was 5.6/11 (range 3–8). Funnel plots calculated to assess for bias indicated significant asymmetry at lower sample sizes in both groups.

In the TKR group, studies with 0–3 months between stages showed a significantly lower reinfection rate than 3–6 months (9.5% 21/222 vs 20.7% 28/135, p<0.01). A similar trend was seen in the THR group (6.1% vs 10.7%, p<0.05). No difference was observed for either group between 3–6 and 6–9 months.

There is no consensus regarding the appropriate duration between surgeries in two-stage revisions for infection. Studies stratified by sample size and quality indicate an increased reinfection rate past three months. Published guidance is no substitute for clinical decision-making but the conclusions from this study are to recommend against routine delay of more than 3 months between first and second stage revisions for infected THR and TKR.

The use of Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) remains controversial due to the increased revision rate in female patients. We compared the outcomes of BHR in female patients to an age matched total hip arthroplasty(THA) cohort. We reviewed the pain, function and total Harris Hip Scores(HHS), and Kaplan-Meir survivorship for BHR and THA cohorts from a prospective regional arthroplasty database.

There were 234 patients in each cohort, with mean age of 51 years. The BHR cohort had significantly better function and total HHS at all points of the 5-year study, but not for the post-operative pain score. The 5-year revision rate for the BHR cohort was significantly higher than the THA cohort (6.8% vs 3.4%, p=0.001). The main reason for revision in the BHR cohort was aseptic loosening (n=8), followed by metallosis (n=3). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 92.6% (95% CI±1.7%) and 96.4% (95% CI±1.3%) for the BHR and THA cohort (p=0.001).

BHR can give significantly better functional outcomes than THA. The vast majority of female patients were happy with BHR and did not need further surgery at the 5-year stage. This is somewhat at odds with the recent reputation of the procedure. The 10-year result of the same cohort is warranted to provide further data. Our study is not a recommendation to still offer BHR to female patients, but rather to inject a note of realism into the debate. There are implications for future implant development in that these results do validate resurfacing as a functionally valuable option for active patients.

British national guidelines recommend agents which antagonise factor Xa or warfarin as prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in lower limb arthroplasty. However, they discourage the use of aspirin prophylaxis.

We conducted a prospective, multi-centre audit between two national centres, Ninewells Hospital in Dundee and the Royal Infirmary in Edinburgh to compare bleeding and VTE risk. Only Edinburgh routinely uses aspirin as VTE prophylaxis. The study comprises a number of cycles from 2013 to 2015. Consecutive groups of patients were identified prospectively using elective theatre data and information extracted from their case-notes on type of VTE prophylaxis, VTE occurrence, wound complications and length of hospital stay for a period of nine weeks post-operatively.

262 Edinburgh patients and 92 Dundee patients were included. Most Edinburgh patients were prescribed aspirin in hospital and on discharge (188/262, 71.8%), in line with local protocol. In Dundee, dalteparin was most commonly prescribed in hospital (68/92, 73.9%) and rivaroxaban on discharge (57/92, 62.0%).

The Edinburgh group had a 1.5% incidence of pulmonary embolus (PE) and a 1% rate of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), 2% had problems with wound haematoma and one patient (0.4%) required a transfusion; no wound washouts were required. In Dundee there was 0% PE, 2% DVT, 5% had problems with haematoma, 3% required transfusion and 2% required washout. There was no difference in length of hospital stay, with a mode of 4 days for both centres.

Non-fatal PE was prevented in Dundee patients but possibly at the cost of greater incidence of wound complications.

A multicentre retrospective study of 879 total hip replacements (THR) was undertaken to investigate any differences in outcome between trainee surgeons and consultants. The effect of trainee supervision was also assessed. The primary outcome measures were survivorship and the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Length of stay was a secondary outcome.

Patients were evaluated pre-operatively and at 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10 years post-operatively. Surgical outcome was compared between junior trainees, senior trainees and consultants. The effect of supervision was determined by comparing supervised and unsupervised trainees. There was no significant difference in post-operative HHS among consultants, senior and junior trainees at 1 year (p=0.122), at 3 years (p=0.282), at 5 years (p=0.063), at 7 years (p=0.875), or at 10 years (p=0.924) follow up. Additionally there was no significant difference in HHS between supervised and unsupervised trainees at 1 year (p=0.220), 3 years (p=0.0.542), 5 years (p=0.880), 7 years (p=0.953) and 10-year (p=0.787) follow-up. Comparison of surgical outcome between the supervised and unsupervised trainees also shows no significant difference in hospital stay (p=0.989), or implant survival years (p=0.257). This study provides evidence that when trainees are appropriately supervised, they can obtain equally good results compared with consultants when performing THR.

The posterior approach to the hip avoids violating abductors and has presumed functional advantages. The anterolateral approach risks abductor damage, but has reportedly lower dislocation rate.

To determine effects of surgical approach on function and dislocation after primary and revision THR 3274 primary THRs and 66 first time revision THRs were investigated from the arthroplasty database (2000–2008).

2682 (82%) primary THRs were via anterolateral approach, 592 (18%) by posterior. Post primary dislocation rate was 50/2682 (1.9%) for anterolateral and 26/592 (4.4%) for posterior. Posterior approach had significantly better Harris Hip Scores: 91 vs 88 (P = 0.000) and function: 40 vs 37 (P = 0.000). Of the 66 revisions THRs, 30 were anterolateral and 36 posterior. Dislocation rates were 2/30 (6.7%) and 4/36 (11.1%) respectively. There was no significant difference in Harris Hip Score or Harris Hip Function 1 year after revision based on revision surgery approach. However there was a significant difference in Harris Hip Function 1 year after revision based on the approach for primary surgery (Anterolateral 30 vs Posterior 37, P=0.008) and a similar trend in Harris Hip Score (Anterolateral 79 vs Posterior 85, P = 0.198) and patients who had posterior approach for both primary and revision had the best scores overall.

The clinical relevance of the modest, but statistically significant difference in Harris hip score after primary THR is unclear. That primary approach has an impact on function after revision suggests the posterior approach should be considered in younger patients likely to require revision in the future.

The surgical treatment of unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis remains controversial. This study aims to compare the medium-term outcomes of age and gender matched patients treated with unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and total knee replacement (TKR).

We retrospectively reviewed pain, function and total knee society scores (KSS) for every UKR and age and gender matched TKR in NHS Tayside, with up to 10 years prospective data from Tayside Arthroplasty Audit Group. KSS was compared at 1, 3 and 5 years. Medical complications and joint revision were identified. Kaplan-Meier with revision as end-point was used for implants survival analysis.

602 UKRs were implanted between 2001 and 2013. Preoperative KSS for pain and total scores were not significantly different between UKRs and TKRs whereas preoperative function score was significantly better for UKRs. Function scores remained significantly better in UKRs from preoperative until 3 years follow up. Further analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the change of function scores in both groups over time. There was a trend for TKRs to perform better than UKRs in pain scores. Total KSS for both groups were not significantly different at any point of the 5-year study. Fewer medical complications were reported in the UKR group. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a survival rate of 93.7% in UKRs and of 97% in TKRs (Log rank p-value = 0.012).

The revision rate for UKR was twice as much as TKR. The theoretical advantages of UKR are not borne out by the findings in this study other than immediate postoperative complications.

Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) screening has reduced rates of MRSA infection in primary total hip (THR) and total knee (TKR) replacements. There are reports of increasing methicillin resistance (MR) in Coagulase Negative Staphylococci (CNS) causing arthroplasty infections. We examined microbiological results of all 2-stage THR/TKR revisions in Tayside from 2001–2010.

72 revisions in 67 patients were included; 30 THRs and 42 TKRs. Mean ages at revision were 89 and 72 years respectively. Male: female ratio 1.4:1.2-year survivorship for all endpoints: 96% in THRs and 88% in TKRs. 5-year survival: 83% and 84% respectively.

The most common organisms were SA (30%) and CNS (29%). Antibiotic resistance was more common amongst CNS. 72% of CNS were resistant to Methicillin versus 20% of SA. 80% of CNS were resistant to Gentamicin OR Methicillin versus 20% of SA. 32% (8/72 cases or 11% overall) of CNS were resistant to BOTH Gentamicin AND Methicillin, the primary arthroplasty antibiotic prophylaxis in our region, versus 4% of SA.

Harris Hip Scores and Knee Society Scores were lower post primary, prior to symptoms of infection in patients who had MR organisms cultured compared with those who had methicillin sensitive organisms. One-year post revision both groups recovered to similar scores.

Our data suggest MR-CNS cause significantly more arthroplasty infections than MRSA. Patients developing MR infections tend to have poorer post-primary knee and hip scores before symptoms of infection fully develop. 32% of CNS causing arthroplasty infections in our region are resistant to current routine primary antibiotic prophylaxis.

Two stage revision for infection is considered the gold standard with a success rate of 80–90%. Overall functional outcomes of these patients are commonly overlooked. There is a trend towards single stage revision to improve functional outcomes.

We examined the functional scores of 2 stage revision for total hip arthroplasty (THR) and total knee arthroplasty (TKR). 72 revisions were identified over 9 years: 30 THR and 42 TKR. Two year survivorship was 96% in THR revision and 88% TKR revision. Five year survival was 83% and 84% respectively. 50 patients (without recurrence of infection) had recorded functional scores at a minimum of 1 year.

The mean Harris-hip score (HHS) of THR was 75 (21 patients) prior to developing symptoms of infection. Once infected, the mean score fell to 46. At 1 year post revision it returned to 77. At 3 years HHS of 78 (12 patients) and at 5 yrs 62 (3 patients).

The mean knee society score (KSS) of TKR was 66 (29 patients) prior to developing symptoms of infection. Once infected, the mean score fell to 34. At 1 year post revision it returned to 73. At 3 years KSS of 76 (16 patients) and at 5 years 62 (10 patients).

We conclude that functional scores of staged revisions of infected THR and TKR return to pre-morbid levels within a year of completing the second stage. Although single stage revision may have a quicker return to function, by 1 year, staged revision has comparable results.