A new generation of knee prostheses has been introduced with the intention of improving post-operative knee flexion. In order to evaluate whether this goal has been achieved we performed a
We investigated the efficacy and safety profile of commonly used venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis agents following hip and knee arthroplasty. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and OrthoSearch was performed. Prophylaxis agents investigated were aspirin (< 325 mg and ≥ 325 mg daily), enoxaparin, dalteparin, fondaparinux, unfractionated heparin, warfarin, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and dabigatran. The primary efficacy outcome of interest was the risk of VTE, whereas the primary safety outcomes of interest were the risk of major bleeding events (MBE) and wound complications (WC). VTE was defined as the confirmed diagnosis of any deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism. Network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect evidence was performed. Cluster rank analysis using the surface under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) was applied to compare each intervention group, weighing safety and efficacy outcomes.Aims
Methods
Removal of infected components and culture-directed antibiotics are important for the successful treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 27% of chronic PJI patients yield negative culture results. Although culture negativity has been thought of as a contraindication to one-stage revision, data supporting this assertion are limited. The aim of our study was to report on the clinical outcomes for one-stage and two-stage exchange arthroplasty performed in patients with chronic culture-negative PJI. A total of 105 consecutive patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI were retrospectively evaluated. One-stage revision arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, while 75 patients underwent two-stage exchange, with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Reinfection, re-revision for septic and aseptic reasons, amputation, readmission, mortality, and length of stay were compared between the two treatment strategies.Aims
Methods
Access to joint replacement is being restricted for patients with comorbidities in a number of high-income countries. However, there is little evidence on the impact of comorbidities on outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of hip and knee arthroplasty in patients with and without comorbidities. In total, 312,079 hip arthroplasty and 328,753 knee arthroplasty patients were included. A total of 11 common comorbidities were identified in administrative hospital records. Safety risks were measured by assessing length of hospital stay (LOS) and 30-day emergency readmissions and mortality. Effectiveness outcomes were changes in Oxford Hip or Knee Scores (OHS/OKS) (scale from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)) and in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) (scale from 0 (death) to 1 (full health)) from immediately before, to six months after, surgery. Regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted mean differences (LOS, change in OHS/OKS/EQ-5D) and risk differences (readmissions and mortality).Aims
Methods
We report a systematic review and meta-analysis
of the peer-reviewed literature focusing on metal sensitivity testing
in patients undergoing total joint replacement (TJR). Our purpose
was to assess the risk of developing metal hypersensitivity post-operatively
and its relationship with outcome and to investigate the advantages
of performing hypersensitivity testing. We undertook a comprehensive search of the citations quoted in
PubMed and EMBASE: 22 articles (comprising 3634 patients) met the
inclusion criteria. The frequency of positive tests increased after
TJR, especially in patients with implant failure or a metal-on-metal
coupling. The probability of developing a metal allergy was higher
post-operatively (odds ratio (OR) 1.52 (95% confidence interval
(CI) 1.06 to 2.31)), and the risk was further increased when failed
implants were compared with stable TJRs (OR 2.76 (95% CI 1.14 to
6.70)). Hypersensitivity testing was not able to discriminate between
stable and failed TJRs, as its predictive value was not statistically
proven. However, it is generally thought that hypersensitivity testing
should be performed in patients with a history of metal allergy
and in failed TJRs, especially with metal-on-metal implants and
when the cause of the loosening is doubtful.
