Although periarticular injection plays an important role in multimodal pain management following total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is no consensus on the optimal composition of the injection. In particular, it is not clear whether the addition of a corticosteroid improves the pain relief achieved nor whether it is associated with more complications than are observed without corticosteroid. The aim of this study was to quantify the safety and effectiveness of cortocosteroid use in periarticular injection during THA. We conducted a prospective, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving patients scheduled for unilateral THA. A total of 187 patients were randomly assigned to receive periarticular injection containing either a corticosteroid (CS group) or without corticosteroid (no-CS group). Other perioperative interventions were identical for all patients. The primary outcome was postoperative pain at rest during the initial 24 hours after surgery. Pain score was recorded every three hours until 24 hours using a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). The primary outcome was assessed based on the area under the curve (AUC).Aims
Methods
We undertook a prospective, randomised study in order to evaluate the efficacy of clamping the drains after intra-articular injection of saline with 1:500 000 adrenaline compared with post-operative blood salvage in reducing blood loss in 212 total knee arthroplasties. The mean post-operative drained blood volume after drain clamping was 352.1 ml compared to 662.3 ml after blood salvage (p <
0.0001). Allogenic blood transfusion was needed in one patient in the drain group and for three in the blood salvage group. Drain clamping with intra-articular injection of saline with adrenaline is more effective than post-operative autologous blood transfusion in reducing blood loss during total knee arthroplasty.
We describe a patient with a traumatic spondylolisthesis of L5 and multiple, bilateral pedicle fractures from L2 to L5. Conservative treatment was chosen, with eventual neurological recovery and bony union. We are not aware of previous reports of this pattern of injury.
We undertook 114 arthroscopic meniscal repairs in 111 patients and subsequently carried out second-look arthroscopy to confirm meniscal healing at a mean of 13 months after repair. Stable healing at the repaired site was seen in 90. Of these, however, 13 had another arthroscopy later for a further tear. The mean period between the repair and the observation of a repeat tear was 48 months. Of the 13 patients, 11 had returned to high activity levels (International Knee Documentation Committee level I or II) after the repair. An attempt should be made to preserve meniscal function by repairing tears, but even after arthroscopic confirmation of stable healing repaired menisci may tear again. The long-term rate of healing may not be as high as is currently reported. Second-look arthroscopy cannot predict late meniscal failure and may not be justified as a method of assessment for meniscal healing. Young patients engaged in arduous sporting activities should be reviewed regularly even after arthroscopic confirmation of healing.
