We evaluated the quality of guidelines on thromboprophylaxis
in orthopaedic surgery by examining how they adhere to validated
methodological standards in their development. A structured review
was performed for guidelines that were published between January
2005 and April 2013 in medical journals or on the Internet. A pre-defined
computerised search was used in
The number of arthroplasties being undertaken
is expected to grow year on year, and periprosthetic joint infections will
be an increasing socioeconomic burden. The challenge to prevent
and eradicate these infections has resulted in the emergence of
several new strategies, which are discussed in this review. Cite this article:
The use of robots in orthopaedic surgery is an
emerging field that is gaining momentum. It has the potential for significant
improvements in surgical planning, accuracy of component implantation
and patient safety. Advocates of robot-assisted systems describe
better patient outcomes through improved pre-operative planning
and enhanced execution of surgery. However, costs, limited availability,
a lack of evidence regarding the efficiency and safety of such systems
and an absence of long-term high-impact studies have restricted
the widespread implementation of these systems. We have reviewed
the literature on the efficacy, safety and current understanding of
the use of robotics in orthopaedics. Cite this article:
Peri-prosthetic osteolysis and subsequent aseptic
loosening is the most common reason for revising total hip replacements.
Wear particles originating from the prosthetic components interact
with multiple cell types in the peri-prosthetic region resulting
in an inflammatory process that ultimately leads to peri-prosthetic
bone loss. These cells include macrophages, osteoclasts, osteoblasts
and fibroblasts. The majority of research in peri-prosthetic osteolysis
has concentrated on the role played by osteoclasts and macrophages.
The purpose of this review is to assess the role of the osteoblast
in peri-prosthetic osteolysis. In peri-prosthetic osteolysis, wear particles may affect osteoblasts
and contribute to the osteolytic process by two mechanisms. First,
particles and metallic ions have been shown to inhibit the osteoblast
in terms of its ability to secrete mineralised bone matrix, by reducing
calcium deposition, alkaline phosphatase activity and its ability
to proliferate. Secondly, particles and metallic ions have been
shown to stimulate osteoblasts to produce pro inflammatory mediators Cite this article:
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis
to compare the efficacy of intermittent mechanical compression combined
with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, against either mechanical
compression or pharmacological prophylaxis in preventing deep-vein
thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism in patients undergoing hip
or knee replacement. A total of six randomised controlled trials,
evaluating a total of 1399 patients, were identified. In knee arthroplasty,
the rate of DVT was reduced from 18.7% with anticoagulation alone
to 3.7% with combined modalities (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, p = 0.03;
number needed to treat: seven). There was moderate, albeit non-significant,
heterogeneity (I2 = 42%). In hip replacement, there was
a non-significant reduction in DVT from 8.7% with mechanical compression
alone to 7.2% with additional pharmacological prophylaxis (RR 0.84)
and a significant reduction in DVT from 9.7% with anticoagulation
alone to 0.9% with additional mechanical compression (RR 0.17, p
<
0.001; number needed to treat: 12), with no heterogeneity (I2 =
0%). The included studies had insufficient power to demonstrate
an effect on pulmonary embolism. We conclude that the addition of intermittent mechanical leg
compression augments the efficacy of anticoagulation in preventing
DVT in patients undergoing both knee and hip replacement. Further
research on the role of combined modalities in thromboprophylaxis
in joint replacement and in other high-risk situations, such as fracture
of the hip, is warranted.
Using inaccurate quotations can propagate misleading
information, which might affect the management of patients. The
aim of this study was to determine the predictors of quotation inaccuracy
in the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid.
We randomly selected 100 papers from ten orthopaedic journals. All references
were retrieved in full text when available or otherwise excluded.
Two observers independently rated all quotations from the selected
papers by comparing the claims made by the authors with the data
and expressed opinions of the reference source. A statistical analysis
determined which article-related factors were predictors of quotation
inaccuracy. The mean total inaccuracy rate of the 3840 verified
quotes was 7.6%. There was no correlation between the rate of inaccuracy
and the impact factor of the journal. Multivariable analysis identified
the journal and the type of study (clinical, biomechanical, methodological,
case report or review) as important predictors of the total quotation
inaccuracy rate. We concluded that inaccurate quotations in the peer-reviewed
orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid were common and slightly
more so for certain journals and certain study types. Authors, reviewers
and editorial staff play an important role in reducing this inaccuracy.
The poor reporting and use of statistical methods in orthopaedic papers has been widely discussed by both clinicians and statisticians. A detailed review of research published in general orthopaedic journals was undertaken to assess the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting. A representative sample of 100 papers was assessed for compliance to CONSORT and STROBE guidelines and the quality of the statistical reporting was assessed using a validated questionnaire. Overall compliance with CONSORT and STROBE guidelines in our study was 59% and 58% respectively, with very few papers fulfilling all criteria. In 37% of papers patient numbers were inadequately reported; 20% of papers introduced new statistical methods in the ‘results’ section not previously reported in the ‘methods’ section, and 23% of papers reported no measurement of error with the main outcome measure. Taken together, these issues indicate a general lack of statistical rigour and are consistent with similar reviews undertaken in a number of other scientific and clinical research disciplines. It is imperative that the orthopaedic research community strives to improve the quality of reporting; a failure to do so could seriously limit the development of future research.