Distal radius fractures (DRF) are very common injuries. National recommendations (British Orthopaedic Association, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)) exist in the UK to guide the management of these injuries. These guidelines provide recommendations about several aspects of care including which type of injuries to treat non-operatively and surgically, timing of surgery and routine follow-up. In particular, current recommendations include considering immobilizing patients for 4 weeks in plaster for those managed conservatively, and operating on fractures within 72 hours for intra-articular injuries and 7 days for extra-articular fractures. With increased demands for services and an ageing population, prompt surgery for those presenting with distal radius fractures is not always possible. A key factor is the need for prompt surgery for hip fracture patients.

This study is an audit of the current standard of care at a busy level 2 trauma unit against national guidelines for the management of DRFs. This retrospective audit includes all patients presenting to our emergency department from June to September 2018. Patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of a closed distal radius fracture and follow-up in our department were included in the study. Those with open fractures were excluded. Data was retrieved from clinical coding, electronic patient records, and IMPAX Client (Picture archiving and communication system). The following data was collected on patients treated conservatively and those managed surgically:- (1)Time to surgery for surgical management; (2)Period of immobilization for both conservative and operative groups.

45 patients (13 male, 32 female) with 49 distal radius fractures (2 patients had bilateral injuries) were included. Patients had mean age 63 years (range 19 to 92 years) 30 wrists were treated non-operatively and 19 wrists treated surgically (8 K-wires, 10 ORIF, 1 MUA). Mean time to surgery in the operative group was 8 days (range 1 – 21 days, median 7 days). Mean time to surgery for intra-articular fractures was 7 days (range 1 – 21) and 12 days for extra-articular fractures (range 4 – 20). Mean immobilization period in those treated in plaster is 6 weeks (range 4 – 13 weeks, median 5.6 weeks).

At busy level 2 trauma units with limited theatre capacity and a high volume of hip fracture admissions, time to surgery for less urgent injuries such as wrist fractures is often delayed. National guidelines are useful in helping to guide management however their standards are often difficult to achieve in the context of increasing populations in urban areas and an ageing population.

Introduction

We report the outcomes of minimally invasive technique for posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure using Hollow Modular Anchorage (HMA) screws supplemented by routine pedicle screw fixation (Dynesis).

The main surgical options for hallux rigidus include dorsal cheilectomy, arthroplasty and fusion. Compared to other surgical procedures dorsal cheilectomy involves relatively less bone loss, maintains joint motion and still leaves the potential for a further salvage procedure such as arthrodesis. The Manchester – Oxford Foot and Ankle Questionnaire (MOXFQ) has been endorsed by the British Foot and Ankle Society and recommended as a tool to measure surgical outcome.

The aim of this study was to prospectively follow-up patients following dorsal cheilectomy for hallux rigidus using the patient-reported outcome measure, the MOXFQ. Patients were deemed suitable for dorsal cheilectomy if they had symptoms of dorsal impingement (painful restriction of terminal dorsiflexion of the hallux), with absence of pain in the mid-range of passive movement (indicative of end stage arthritis), and dorsal osteophytes on radiographs.

Twenty five patients with a mean age of 62 years (range: 39 – 80 years) and comprising 17 females underwent dorsal cheilectomy for hallux rigidus. At a mean follow-up of 17 months (range 9–27 months), the mean MOXFQ score improved from 33/64 (95% CI: 27 – 38) pre-operatively to 9/64 (95% CI: 6 – 13) post-operatively. Eighty-four percent of patients had a clinically significant improvement in their walking domain, 68% in the social domain, and 59% in the pain domain of the MOXFQ. Four patients were deemed failures: three patients underwent subsequent arthrodesis for persisting pain, and one patient had no improvement in any domain of the MOXFQ.

In conclusion, this study has provided further evidence of the success of dorsal cheilectomy as a reliable treatment option for hallux rigidus. It has also demonstrated the sensitivity of the patient focused reporting instrument the MOXFQ in assessing surgical outcomes in foot surgery.

Introduction: The use of mini C-arm systems has become established in hand surgery. Potential advantages of the mini C-arm include decreased radiation exposure by reducing screening time, increased distance from the beam, tighter beam collimation and surgeon control of the C-arm. Little has been written in the literature regarding their use in foot and ankle surgery.

Aims: To compare the radiation dose and screening times delivered by the mini C-arm with standard fluoroscopy in elective foot and ankle surgical procedures. A secondary objective was to quantify the cost of both techniques.

Patients and methods: We prospectively studied 137 patients who underwent fluoroscopic screening during various elective foot and ankle procedures. Of these 72 were screened using standard fluoroscopy and the remaining 55 using the mini C-arm. During each procedure screening time and radiation dose were prospectively recorded. The Dose Area Product (DAP) meters on both machines for the determination of radiation exposure and scatter to the operating theatre and staff were used. A cost benefit analysis for radiographer attendance and theatre delay was calculated.

Results: The mean DAP for standard fluoroscopy was 7.43 CGycm2 (sd 9.41) whereas with the mini C-arm it was 3.46 CGycm2 (sd 3.51). There was a statistically significant reduction in the DAP (P = 0.0013). Mean screening time was 13 seconds (SD 14.7) with standard fluoroscopy and 14.5 seconds (SD 18.1) with the mini C-arm. No statistically significant difference was found between screening times. (p = 0.987). The potential total saving of the mini c-arm for 137 procedures was £4086

Conclusion: We recommend the use of the mini C-arm in foot and ankle surgery as it reduces radiation exposure and cost when compared to standard fluoroscopy. We acknowledge that there is a learning curve for surgeons to minimise screening time.

Aim: To measure the quality of five major scientific meetings by assessing the publication rate of papers presented and recording their citation index.

Material and Methods: Abstracts of podium presentations at the meetings of the Scoliosis Research Society, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, British Scoliosis Society, BritSpine and Eurospine were included. We performed a Medline search to identify publications from the abstract. We calculated the time from meeting to publication and recorded the citation rate of the articles.

Results: Of 396 abstracts, 182 were published in peer-review journals – a publication rate of 46%. The publication rates of the five meetings (SRS, BSS, ISSLS, Eurospine, Britspine) were 69%, 53%, 51%, 38%, 24% respectively. Most publications were in “Spine” (55%), then European Spine Journal (11%). The median citation rate of the papers from the SRS, ISSLS, BSS, Eurospine, Britspine meetings was 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The average time to publication was 16 months.

Discussion & Conclusions: Podium presentation is a valuable means for the dissemination of research findings. However, a paper in a peer-reviewed journal is subjected to greater scrutiny, and is perhaps a better indicator of the work’s merit. The average rate of publication in medicine following presentation is 45%1. Spinal meetings are within this range. Although the quality of the scientific work is not the only factor to determine publication, and nor is the quality of the presentations the only factor to assess in evaluating a meeting, the rate of publication and citation rate provide an indicator of the quality and scientific level of meetings.

Aim: To measure the quality of five major scientific meetings by assessing the publication rate of papers presented and recording their citation index.

Material and Methods: Abstracts of podium presentations at the meetings of the Scoliosis Research Society, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, British Scoliosis Society, BritSpine and Eurospine were included. We performed a Medline search to identify publications from the abstract. We calculated the time from meeting to publication and recorded the citation rate of the articles.

Results: Of 396 abstracts, 182 were published in peer-review journals – a publication rate of 46%. The publication rates of the five meetings (SRS, BSS, ISSLS, Eurospine, Britspine) were 69%, 53%, 51%, 38%, 24% respectively. Most publications were in “Spine” (55%), then European Spine Journal (11%). The median citation rate of the papers from the SRS, ISSLS, BSS, Eurospine, Britspine meetings was 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The average time to publication was 16 months.

Discussion & Conclusions: Podium presentation is a valuable means for the dissemination of research findings. However, a paper in a peer-reviewed journal is subjected to greater scrutiny, and is perhaps a better indicator of the work’s merit.

The average rate of publication in medicine following presentation is 45%¹. Spinal meetings are within this range.

Although the quality of the scientific work is not the only factor to determine publication, and nor is the quality of the presentations the only factor to assess in evaluating a meeting, the rate of publication and citation rate provide an indicator of the quality and scientific level of meetings.

Bone stock loss secondary to debris and mechanic alin-stability presents a challenge in revision hip arthroplasty. The aim of our study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of revision hip arthroplasty using the Oxford hip prosthesis combined with impaction allografting.

Between 1999 and 2002, we revised 72 hips in 69 patients using this technique (mean age 65years). Indications were aseptic loosening (56), infection (8), peri-prosthetic fracture (7) and a broken stem (1). The mean time to revision was 8.5 years (1–21years). Patients were assessed clinically and with the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) pre- and post-operatively. Fifty-seven patients also had acetabular revision. Four patients required femoral osteotomy to remove the old prosthesis. We used a mean of 1.8 (1–4) femoral heads per operation.

Patients were mobilised partially weight bearing (8weeks) followed by a gradual return to full loading. Complications included peri-operative femoral fracture (6), infection (6), dislocation (10), DVT (1)and PE (2). The average blood transfusion was 1.8 units (0–9). The OHS improved from 45 (26–58) pre-operatively to 24.3 post-operatively (12–43). No hip has been re-revised for aseptic loosening at a mean follow-up of 32.7months (16–51).

The Oxford hip is a trimodular prosthesis with a polished tapered metaphyseal section that is free to slide and rotate on the stem. The stem is first inserted uncemented into the diaphysis. Bone graft is impacted proximally, with mesh if necessary, and then the proximal wedge is cemented in. The wedge allows for some subsidence in the cement and creates optimal radial force transmission, which is essential for bone-remodelling stimulation and preventing proximal stress shielding. Although this is a short-term experience, we believe that the use of the tri-modular Oxford stem combined with minimal proximal impaction allografting is a reliable method of dealing with difficult revision femoral surgery. The results were comparable with a primary arthroplasty in terms of pain relief and functional results.

The purpose of the study: to determine if Patient height-and gender could be used to predict component size With a minimally invasiveapproach for unicompartmental knee replacement.

Material and methods: One hundred x-rays of patients (44 men, 56 women), who had undergone Oxford UKR, were reviewed. The preoperative radiographs were assessed for component size using the standard template. The postoperative x-rays were reviewed to determine-whether the ideal component size had been used or if not what could be the most appropriate. Patient’s height was recorded. The proportion of patients for whom an appropriate size could be selected by either template or height measurements was calculated.

Current templating system accurately predicted the ideal size in 67%. In no case was the size incorrect by more than one size. The following size bands were set according to height. For men: size small in patients less than160 cm, medium less than 170 cm and large less than 180cm. For women: size small in patients less than 165 cm, medium less than 175cm and large less than 185 cm. Height accurately predicted the ideal size in75%. In no case was the assessment of component size incorrect by more than one size.

As the Oxford femoral component is spherical, its size is not critical and it is acceptable to use one size too large or too small. Both height and templating safely predicted an acceptable size in all cases and predicted the ideal size in about 70% > Conclusion: Gender specific height should be used to predict the component size in situations were templating is difficult as in digital x-rays orsuperimposition of the two femoral condyles, and non-standardised x-raymagnification.

Aim: To investigate the functional and radiological outcome of shelf acetabuloplasty in adults with significantly symptomatic acetabular dysplasia, with a minimum of a 5 year follow-up.

Material and Methods: 77 consecutive shelf procedures (68 patients) with an average follow-up of 10.9 years (range: 6–14) were reviewed. The Oxford hip score (OHS) was used for clinical assessment. Centre-edge angle (CEA) and acetabular angle (AA) were measured as indicators of joint containment. The severity of osteoarthiritis was based primarily on the extent of joint space narrowing. Survivorship analyses using conversion to THR as an endpoint were performed. Logrank tests were used to compare the survivorship of the shelf procedure against the variables of age, preoperative osteoarthiritis, pre and postoperative AA, CEA angles.

Results: The average age at time of surgery was 33 years (range: 17–60). At the time of the last follow-up, the mean OHS was 34.6 (maximum score: 48). Mean postoperative CEA was 55 (Pre-operatively: 13 degrees) while mean postoperative AA was 31 (Pre-operatively: 48 degrees). Thirty percent of hips needed THR at an average duration of 7.3 years. The survival in the 45 patients with only slight or no joint space narrowing was 97% (CI, 93%–100%) at 5 years and 80% (CI, 56%–100%) at 10 years. This was significantly higher (p= 0.0007) than the survival in the 32 patients with moderate or severe osteoarthiritis, which was 72% (CI, 55%–89%) at 5 years and 29% (CI, 13%–45%) at 10 years. There was no significant relationship between survival and age, pre and postoperative AA, CEA angles (p> 0.05).

Conclusion: Shelf-acetabuloplasty offers symptomatic relief to adults with acetabular dysplasia but overall deteriorates with time. About 50% of the patients do not need THR for over 10 years. Best results with shelf-acetabuloplasty were achieved in patients with slight or no joint narrowing.

Background: Hip dysplasia is a complex developmental process. Untreated acetabular dysplasia is the most common cause of secondary hip osteoarthiritis. With increased interest in redirectional pelvic osteotomies, the role of the shelf procedure needs to be re-defined.

Aim of the study: to investigate the effectiveness of the shelf procedure in adults with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia by assessing the functional and radiological outcome at a minimum of five years follow-up.

Material and Methods: Seventy-six consecutive adults with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia treated with acetabular shelf augmentation, have been followed up for an average period of 11 years (range: 6–14). The mean age was thirty-three years (range: 17–60 years). The Oxford hip score (OHS) was used for clinical assessment. Centre-edge angle (CEA) and acetabular angle (AA) were measured to determine femoral head coverage. Osteoarthiritis severity was based primarily on the width of the joint space using the De Mourgues classification. Survivorship analyses using conversion to THR as an endpoint were performed. logrank test was used to compare the outcome of the shelf against the variables of age, preoperative osteoarthiritis, preoperative and postoperative AA, CEA angles.

Results: The shelf procedure improved the mean preoperative CEA from 11° (range: 20° to 17°) to 50° postoperatively (range: 30° to 70°) and the mean preoperative AA from 52° (range: 46° to 64°) to 32° postoperatively (range: 18° to 57°). The Mean OHS was 34.6 (hip score maximum: 48). Thirty percent of hips needed THR at an average duration of 7.3 years. Survival analysis using conversion to THR as an endpoint was 86% (CI, 76%–95%) at five years and 46% (CI, 27%–65%) at ten years. The survival in the 44 patients with only slight or no joint space narrowing was 97% (CI, 93%–100%) at 5 years and 75% (CI, 51%–100%) at 10 years. This was significantly higher (p= 0.0007) than the survival in the 32 patients with moderate or severe osteoarthiritis, which was 76% (CI, 55%–89%) at 5 years and 22% (CI, 5%–38%) at 10 years. There was no significant relationship between survival and age (p= 0.37), pre and postoperative centre-edge angle (p= 0.39), or acetabular angle (p= 0.85).

Conclusion: Shelf acetabuloplasty is a reliable, safe procedure offering medium-term symptomatic relief for adults with acetabular dysplasia. The best results were achieved in patients with slight or no joint space narrowing.

Introduction: With a minimally invasive approach for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKA), it is difficult to determine the femoral component size intra-operatively. It can be difficult to template pre-operative radiographs due to superimposition of the two femoral condyles, and non-standardised x-ray magnification.

Aim: The purpose of the study was to find an easy, reliable, alternative method for this assessment such as height and gender.

Material and methods: One hundred x-rays of patients (44 men, 56 women), who had undergone Oxford UKR, were reviewed. Preoperative radiographs were templated, and postoperative x-rays were reviewed to determine the ideal component size. Patient’s height was recorded. The proportion of patients for whom an appropriate size could be selected by either template or height measurements was calculated.

Results: Current templating system accurately predicted the ideal size in 67 patients. The following size bands were set according to height. For men: size small in patients less than160 cm, medium less than 170 cm and large less than 180 cm. For women: size small in patients less than 164 cm, medium less than 174 cm and large less than 184 cm. Height accurately predicted the ideal size in 75 patients. In no case was the assessment of component size incorrect by more than one size.

Conclusion: Gender specific height safely predicted the ideal component size in 75 percent of patients undergoing UKA. Component size can be determined satisfactorily from patient height and gender and can be used as adjunct to existing templating method.

We followed up 76 consecutive hips with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia treated by acetabular shelf augmentation for a mean period of 11 years. Survival analysis using conversion to hip replacement as an end-point was 86% at five years and 46% at ten years. Forty-four hips with slight or no narrowing of the joint space pre-operatively had a survival of 97% at five and 75% at ten years. This was significantly higher (p = 0.0007) than that of the 32 hips with moderate or severe narrowing of the joint-space, which was 76% at five and 22% at ten years. There was no significant relationship between survival and age (p = 0.37) or the pre- and post-operative centre-edge (p = 0.39) and acetabular angles (p = 0.85).

Shelf acetabuloplasty is a reliable, safe procedure offering medium-term symptomatic relief for adults with acetabular dysplasia. The best results were achieved in patients with mild and moderate dysplasia of the hip with little arthritis.

Aim: To investigate the functional and radiological outcome of shelf acetabuloplasty in adults with significantly symptomatic acetabular dysplasia, with a minimum of a 5 year follow-up.

Material and Methods: 77 consecutive shelf procedures (68 patients) with an average follow-up of 10.9 years (range: 6–17) were reviewed. The Oxford hip score (OHS) was used for clinical assessment. Centre-edge angle (CEA) and acetabular angle (AA) were measured as indicators of joint containment. The severity of osteoarthiritis was based primarily on the extent of joint space narrowing. Survivorship analyses using conversion to THR as an endpoint were performed. Logrank tests were used to compare the survivorship of the shelf procedure against the variables of age, preoperative osteoarthiritis, pre and postoperative AA, CEA angles.

Results: The average age at time of surgery was 33 years (range: 17–60). At the time of the last follow-up, the mean OHS was 34.6 (maximum score: 48). Mean postoperative CEA was 55 (Pre-operatively: 13 degrees) while mean postoperative AA was 31 (Pre-operatively: 48 degrees). Thirty percent of hips needed THR at an average duration of 7.3 years. The survival in the 45 patients with only slight or no joint space narrowing was 97% (CI, 93%-100%) at 5 years and 75% (CI, 51%-100%) at 10 years. This was significantly higher (p≤= 0.0007) than the survival in the 32 patients with moderate or severe osteoarthiritis, which was 76% (CI, 55%-89%) at 5 years and 22% (CI, 5%-38%) at 10 years. There was no significant relationship between survival and age, pre and postoperative AA, CEA angles (p> 0.05).

Conclusion: Shelf-acetabuloplasty offers symptomatic relief to adults with acetabular dysplasia but overall deteriorates with time. About 50% of the patients do not need THR for over 10 years. Best results with shelf-acetabuloplasty were achieved in patients with slight or no joint narrowing.

Purpose of the study: To evaluate the clinical outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the Oxford Hip prosthesis combined with impaction allografting. Methods and results: The Oxford hip is a trimodular prosthesis with a polished tapered metaphyseal section that is free to slide on the stem. The stem is inserted uncemented into the diaphysis, bone graft is impacted proximally, with mesh if necessary, and then the proximal wedge is cemented in.

Between 1999 and 2002, we revised 72 hips in 69 patients using this technique (mean age 65years, 28 to 88). Fifty-six cases had aseptic loosening, 8 had infection (2 stages), 7 had peri-prosthetic fractures and 1 had a broken stem. The mean time to revision was 8.5years (1 to 21). Patients were assessed clinically and with the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) pre- and post-operatively. Fifty-seven patients also had acetabular revision. Four patients required femoral osteotomy to remove the old prosthesis. We used a mean of 1.8 (1 to 4) femoral heads per operation.

Complications included 6 peri-operative femoral fractures diagnosed at operation and fixed successfully, 6 infections, 10 dislocations (2 were recurrent), one deep vein thrombosis, 2 pulmonary embolism and one gastrointestinal haemorrhage. The average blood transfusion was 1.8 units (0 to 9).

The OHS improved from 45 (26 to 58) pre-operatively to 24.3 post-operatively (12 to 43). No hip has been re-revised for aseptic loosening at a mean follow-up of 32.7 months (16 to 51).

Conclusion: Although we accept that this is only a preliminary experience, we believe that the use of the trimodular Oxford stem combined with minimal proximal impaction allografting was found to be a reliable method and a successful way of dealing with revision femoral surgery. The results were comparable with a primary arthroplasty in terms of pain relief and functional results

Introduction: Persistent acetabular dysplasia is a recognized cause of premature hip arthritis. Treatment options include joint preservation (acetabuloplasty/osteotomy) or salvage procedures (THR). Presence of a deficient acetabulum and an elevated acetabular centre make THR technically demanding with uncertain outcome. Shelf ace-tabuloplasty is a viable option, however, most reports in the literature focus on results in children and adolescents.

Aim: To investigate the functional and radiological outcome of shelf acetabuloplasty in adults with significantly symptomatic acetabular dysplasia.

Material and Methods: 77 consecutive shelf procedures (68 patients) with an average follow-up of 10.9 years (range: 6–17) were reviewed. The Oxford hip score (OHS) was used for clinical assessment. Centre-edge angle (CEA) and acetabular angle (AA) were measured as indicators of joint containment.

Results: The average age at surgery was 33 years (range: 17–60). At the time of last follow-up; the mean OHS was 34 (maximum score: 48). Mean postoperative CEA was 59 (Pre-operatively: 16.2 degrees) while mean postoperative AA was 31 (Pre-operatively: 47.5 degrees). Thirty percent of hips needed THR at an average duration of 7.3 years. Pre-operative arthritis was present in 32 hips out of which 17 (53 percent) needed THR. Out of the remaining 45 hips, only 6 (13 percent) needed THR. No correlation was found between the acetabular indices and the outcome.

Conclusion: Shelf-acetabuloplasty offers symptomatic relief to adults with acetabular dysplasia and can delay the need for THR for over 10 years. Best results with shelf-acetabuloplasty were achieved in patients without preoperative arthritis.