The diagnosis of surgical site infection following endoprosthetic reconstruction for bone tumours is frequently a subjective diagnosis. Large clinical trials use blinded Central Adjudication Committees (CACs) to minimise the variability and bias associated with assessing a clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to determine the level of inter-rater and intra-rater agreement in the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial. The Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial CAC adjudicated 29 non-PARITY cases of lower extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction. The CAC members classified each case according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) criteria for surgical site infection (superficial, deep, or organ space). Combinatorial analysis was used to calculate the smallest CAC panel size required to maximise agreement. A final meeting was held to establish a consensus.Objectives
Materials and Methods
142 patients experienced significant postoperative morbidity consisting of 24 myocardial infarctions, 46 respiratory tract infections, 33 urinary tract infections, 3 cerebral vascular accidents and 36 exacerbations of congestive cardiac failure. There was no correlation between morbidity and location or type of fracture. The mean age (86.1 yrs) and length of stay (26 days) was greater in the morbidity group (p<
0.05). The overall post operative in-patient mortality rate was 9%, rising to 50% in those who suffered a myocardial infarction and 33% in those with exacerbations of congestive cardiac failure.
The treatment protocol consisted of a two stage exchange with removal of infected components via a posterior approach incorporating an extended trochanteric osteotomy, insertion of an interim antibiotic eluting cement spacer and re-implantation of an extensively coated uncemented prosthesis on the femoral side. Systemic antibiotic treatment following each stage consisted of an abridged course of 5 days post operative intravenous administration followed by complete cessation of anti-microbial therapy. The mean interval between implant removal and re-implantation was 111 days.
The in-cement technique for revision hip arthroplasty involves retaining the original cement-bone interface. This has been proven to be a biomechanically stronger method than recementing after complete removal of the original cement mantle. This study reviewed a series of 54 consecutive revision hip arthroplasty procedures, using the in-cement technique, between November 1999 and November 2003. Clinical and radiological follow-up included functional assessment. There were 54 procedures performed in 51 patients, whose mean age at surgery was 70.3 years (45 to 85). A total of 42 were available at a mean follow-up of 29.2 months (6 to 51). There was no radiological evidence of loosening. Functional assessments were available for 40 patients who had a mean Harris hip score of 85.2 (51.9 to 98.5), a mean Oxford hip score of 19.6 (12 to 41), a mean UCLA activity profile score of 5.9 (3 to 8) and a mean SF-36 score of 78.0 (31.6 to 100). The in-cement technique provides consistent, high functional outcomes and should be considered in appropriately selected cases.
Revision of the femoral component during revision hip arthroplasty may pose significant technical challenges, most notably femoral fracture and bone perforation. The in-cementing technique allows use of the original bone-cement interface that has been proven to be biomechanically stronger than recementing after complete removal of the original cement mantle. This historical prospective study reviews a series of 54 consecutive revision hip arthroplasty procedures carried out by the senior author using the in-cementing technique from November 1999 to March 2003. Patients were followed up clinically and radiologically with serial outpatient reviews and their functional outcome was assessed using the Harris hip scoring system, the Oxford hip scoring system and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity profile. Their physical and mental well being was also assessed using the SF-36 self-questionnaire. Fifty-four procedures were performed on 51 patients. There were 31 males and 20 females. The average age was 70.3+/−8.1 years (range: 45 – 83 years). The average time to revision from the original procedure was 132.8+/−59.0 months (range: 26 – 286 months). The average length of follow up was 29.2+/−13.4 months (range: 6 – 51 months) post revision arthroplasty. Two patients suffered dislocations, one of which was recurrent and was revised with a Girdlestone’s procedure. No patient displayed any evidence of radiographical loosening. The average Harris hip score of the study group was 85.2+/−11.6 (range: 51.9 – 98.5). The average Oxford hip score recorded was 19.6+/−7.7 (range: 12 – 41) and the average UCLA activity profile score was 5.9+/−1.6 (range: 3 – 8). The SF-36 questionnaire had an average value of 78.0+/−18.3 (range: 31.6 – 100) with an average physical score of 73.3+/−22.2 (range: 20.5 – 100). In conclusion, we feel the results of this study show excellent clinical and radiological results of the in-cementing technique with high patient satisfaction in terms of functional outcome. This technique merits consideration where possible in revision hip arthroplasty.
We assessed the outcome of patients with Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures treated with femoral revision using an uncemented extensively porous-coated implant. A retrospective clinical and radiographic assessment of 22 patients with a mean follow-up of 33.7 months was performed. The mean time from the index procedure to fracture was 10.8 years. There were 17 patients with a satisfactory result. Complications in four patients included subsidence in two, deep sepsis in one, and delayed union in one. Concomitant acetabular revision was required in 19 patients. Uncemented extensively porous-coated femoral stems incorporate distally allowing stable fixation. We found good early survival rates and a low incidence of nonunion using this implant.
The aim of this study is to assess the success of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative spinal instability. Clinical outcome was assessed by the postoperative symptomatic relief, complications rate and the fusion rate. The fusion rate was assessed using plain radiographs and the Brantigan and Steffee scoring system. Functional outcome was measured by the improvement in the Oswestry disability index, PROLO score, return to work and satisfaction with the surgical outcome. The determinants of functional relief were analysed against the improvement in disability using multiple regression analysis.
The management of long bone infected non-unions; posttraumatic chronic osteomyelitis and primary segmental bone defects constitute some of the most difficult reconstructive challenges encountered by orthopaedic surgeons. Measures employed to treat these conditions are tantamount to limb salvage with amputation a likely outcome if reconstructive endeavors prove unsuccessful. The Ilizarov method of distraction osteogenesis and bone transport, following radical debridement in the case of infection, is one potential management option in such cases.
*Association for the Study and Application of the Methods of Ilizarov
Posterior lumbar interbody fusion is a well described procedure for the treatment of back pain associated with degenerative disc disease and segmental instability. It allows decompression of the spinal canal and circumferential fusion through a single posterior incision. Sixty-five consecutive patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using carbon cages and pedicle fixation between 1993 and 2000 were recruited and contacted with a postal survey. Clinical outcome was assessed by the assessment of postoperative clinical findings and complications and the fusion rate, which was assessed using standard X-rays with the scoring system described by Brantigan and Steffee. Functional outcome was measured by using improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index, PROLO score, return to work and satisfaction with the surgical outcome. The determinants of functional relief were analysed against the improvement in disability using multiple regression analysis. The mean postoperative duration at the time of the study was 4.4 years. The response rate to the survey was 84%. Overall radiological fusion rate was ninety eight percent. There was a significant improvement in Oswestry Disability Index P<
0.001. There was 85% satisfaction with the surgical procedure and 58% return to pre-disease activity level and full employment. In the presence of near total union rate we found preoperative level of disability to be best the determinant of functional recovery irrespective of age or the degree of psychological morbidity (p<
0.0001). The combination of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and posterior instrumented fusion is a safe and effective method of achieving circumferential segmental fusion. This procedure gives sustained long-term improvement in functional outcome and high satisfaction rate. Direct relationship between preoperative level of disability and functional recovery suggests that spinal fusion should be performed to alleviate disability caused by degenerative spine.
Assessment and referral of spinal disease in a primary care setting is a challenge for the general practitioner. This has led to establishment of spinal assessment clinic to insure prompt access to the patient who requires treatment by a spinal surgeon. These clinics are run by a trained physiotherapist who liaises with a member of the spinal team and decides the need for referral to the spinal clinic on the bases of the patient’s history and clinical examination. In our clinic each patient is also assessed with Oswestry disability index, Short form-36, visual analogue score and hospital anxiety score (HADS), although these scores do not contribute to the clinical decision-making. The aim of this study is to assess the screening value of Oswestry disability score, Short form-36 scores in diagnosing acute spinal pathology. Sixty-nine patients who were referred to the spine clinic from the assessment clinic between March and December 2001 were recruited. Sixty-nine age and sex-matched patients were randomly chosen from five hundred and twelve patients who were seen in the spinal assessment clinic and did not need referral to the specialised spine clinic. The Oswestry disability score, Short form-36 scores and pain visual analogue scores between the two groups were statistically compared. The correlation between the level of psychological morbidity, length of symptoms and presence of past history of symptoms against the level of disability was statistically assessed. Although there was a significant increase in the level of disability in the referred group with each score (Oswestry Disability Score P<
0.001, SF-36 physical component score P=0.014, Visual analogue pain score P<
0.001). The variation in the scores makes the scoring system unspecific for use as a screening tool. We also found strong relationship between psychological disability and length of symptoms indicating the need for prompt treatment for back pain.
Two hundred patients with Adhesive Capsulitis according to Codman’s criteria were treated with manipulation under anaesthetic and hydraulic distension by the senior author. The procedure and subsequent rehabilitation was uniform for all patients. The average age at time of procedure was sixty years (range 36–91 years). Follow-up was performed using a self-assessment booklet which we devised to examine outcome in the following areas: Pain Visual Analogue Score, Ten Activities of Daily Living, Ability to Sleep &
Lie on Affected Shoulder, Range of Motion and overall satisfaction. The average length of follow-up was sixty-two months (range 12–125 months). One hundred and forty-five patients were available for follow-up and completed the assessment correctly.
Neonatal septic arthritis is a true orthopaedic emergency posing significant threat to life and limb.