Aims. The primary aim of this study was to assess the independent association of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on postoperative mortality for patients undergoing orthopaedic and trauma surgery. The secondary aim was to identify factors that were associated with developing COVID-19 during the postoperative period. Methods. A multicentre retrospective study was conducted of all patients presenting to nine centres over a 50-day period during the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2020 to 19 April 2020) with a minimum of 50 days follow-up. Patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, priority (urgent or elective), procedure type, COVID-19 status, and postoperative mortality were recorded. Results. During the study period, 1,659 procedures were performed in 1,569 patients. There were 68 (4.3%) patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19. There were 85 (5.4%) deaths postoperatively. Patients who had COVID-19 had a significantly lower survival rate when compared with those without a proven SARS-CoV-2 infection (67.6% vs 95.8%, p < 0.001). When adjusting for confounding variables (older age (p < 0.001), female sex (p = 0.004), hip fracture (p = 0.003), and increasing ASA grade (p < 0.001)) a diagnosis of COVID-19 was associated with an increased mortality risk (hazard ratio 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 3.12; p = 0.014). A total of 62 patients developed COVID-19 postoperatively, of which two were in the elective and 60 were in the urgent group. Patients aged > 77 years (odds ratio (OR) 3.16; p = 0.001), with increasing ASA grade (OR 2.74; p < 0.001), sustaining a hip (OR 4.56; p = 0.008) or periprosthetic fracture (OR 14.70; p < 0.001) were more likely to develop COVID-19 postoperatively. Conclusion. Perioperative COVID-19 nearly doubled the background postoperative mortality risk following surgery. Patients at risk of developing COVID-19 postoperatively (patients > 77 years, increasing morbidity, sustaining a hip or periprosthetic fracture) may benefit from perioperative shielding. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1774–1781

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the severity of anaemia on postoperative complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

We examined the rates of infection and colonisation by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) between January 2003 and May 2004 in order to assess the impact of the introduction of an MRSA policy in October 2003, which required all admissions to be screened. Emergency admissions were treated prophylactically and elective beds ring-fenced. A total of 5594 admissions were cross-referenced with 22 810 microbiology results. The morbidity, mortality and cost of managing MRSA-carrying patients, with a proximal fracture of the femur were compared, in relation to age, gender, American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade and residential status, with a group of matched controls who were MRSA-negative.

In 2004, we screened 1795 of 1796 elective admissions and MRSA was found in 23 (1.3%). We also screened 1122 of 1447 trauma admissions and 43 (3.8%) were carrying MRSA. All ten ward transfers were screened and four (40%) were carriers (all p < 0.001). The incidence of MRSA in trauma patients increased by 2.6% per week of inpatient stay (r = 0.97, p < 0.001). MRSA developed in 2.9% of trauma and 0.2% of elective patients during that admission (p < 0.001). The implementation of the MRSA policy reduced the incidence of MRSA infection by 56% in trauma patients (1.57% in 2003 (17 of 1084) to 0.69% in 2004 (10 of 1447), p = 0.035). Infection with MRSA in elective patients was reduced by 70% (0.56% in 2003 (7 of 1257) to 0.17% in 2004 (3 of 1806), p = 0.06). The cost of preventing one MRSA infection was £3200.

Although colonisation by MRSA did not affect the mortality rate, infection by MRSA more than doubled it. Patients with proximal fractures of the femur infected with MRSA remained in hospital for 50 extra days, had 19 more days of vancomycin treatment and 26 more days of vacuum-assisted closure therapy than the matched controls. These additional costs equated to £13 972 per patient.

From this experience we have been able to describe the epidemiology of MRSA, assess the impact of infection-control measures on MRSA infection rates and determine the morbidity, mortality and economic cost of MRSA carriage on trauma and elective orthopaedic wards.

As of April 2010 all NHS institutions in the United Kingdom are required to publish data on surgical site infection, but the method for collecting this has not been decided. We examined 7448 trauma and orthopaedic surgical wounds made in patients staying for at least two nights between 2000 and 2008 at our institution and calculated the rate of surgical site infection using three definitions: the US Centers for Disease Control, the United Kingdom Nosocomial Infection National Surveillance Scheme and the ASEPSIS system. On the same series of wounds, the infection rate with outpatient follow-up according to Centre for Disease Control was 15.45%, according to the UK Nosocomial infection surveillance was 11.32%, and according to ASEPSIS was 8.79%. These figures highlight the necessity for all institutions to use the same method for diagnosing surgical site infection.

If different methods are used, direct comparisons will be invalid and published rates of infection will be misleading.

Clinical, haematological or economic benefits of post-operative blood salvage with autologous blood re-transfusion have yet to be clearly demonstrated for primary total hip replacement. We performed a prospective randomised study to analyse differences in postoperative haemoglobin levels and homologous blood requirements in two groups of patients undergoing primary total hip replacement.

A series of 158 patients was studied. In one group two vacuum drains were used and in the other the ABTrans autologous retransfusion system. A total of 58 patients (76%) in the re-transfusion group received autologous blood. There was no significant difference in the mean post-operative haemoglobin levels in the two groups. There were, however, significantly fewer patients with post-operative haemoglobin values less than 9.0 g/dl and significantly fewer patients who required transfusion of homologous blood in the re-transfusion group. There was also a small overall cost saving in this group.

Using a computer-based quality assurance program, we analysed peri-operative data on 160 patients undergoing one-stage bilateral hip or knee arthroplasties under regional anaesthesia with routine anaesthetic monitoring and only using peripheral intravenous access for peri-operative safety. We monitored defined intra-operative adverse events such as hypotension, myocardial ischaemia, arrhythmias, hypovolaemia, hypertension and early post-operative complications. We also determined post-operative hip and knee function, and patient satisfaction with different aspects of the anaesthetic management. Those patients undergoing one-stage bilateral arthroplasties were matched according to a cross-stratification which used three variables (American Society of Anesthesiologists’ physical status scoring system, age and joint replaced) to patients undergoing unilateral hip or knee arthroplasties. Serious intra-operative adverse events were, with the exception of intra-operative hypotension, very infrequent in patients undergoing bilateral (nine adverse events) as well as unilateral arthroplasties (five adverse events). Early post-operative complications were also infrequent in both groups. However, the risks of receiving a heterologous blood transfusion (odds ratio 2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 5.0, estimated by exact conditional logistic regression) or vasoactive drugs (odds ratio 3.9; 95% CI 2.0 to 7.8) were significantly greater for patients undergoing bilateral operations. Patient satisfaction with anaesthesia was high; all patients who underwent the one-stage bilateral operation would choose the same anaesthetic technique again.