Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 3 | Pages 292 - 299
1 Mar 2015
Karthik K Colegate-Stone T Dasgupta P Tavakkolizadeh A Sinha J

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: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:292–9.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 1 | Pages 10 - 15
1 Jan 2012
Ollivere B Wimhurst JA M. Clark I Donell ST

The most frequent cause of failure after total hip replacement in all reported arthroplasty registries is peri-prosthetic osteolysis. Osteolysis is an active biological process initiated in response to wear debris. The eventual response to this process is the activation of macrophages and loss of bone.

Activation of macrophages initiates a complex biological cascade resulting in the final common pathway of an increase in osteolytic activity. The biological initiators, mechanisms for and regulation of this process are beginning to be understood. This article explores current concepts in the causes of, and underlying biological mechanism resulting in peri-prosthetic osteolysis, reviewing the current basic science and clinical literature surrounding the topic.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 4 | Pages 556 - 559
1 Apr 2005
Al-Maiyah M Bajwa A Finn P Mackenney P Hill D Port A Gregg PJ

We conducted a randomised, controlled trial to determine whether changing gloves at specified intervals can reduce the incidence of glove perforation and contamination in total hip arthroplasty. A total of 50 patients were included in the study. In the study group (25 patients), gloves were changed at 20-minute intervals or prior to cementation. In the control group (25 patients), gloves were changed prior to cementation. In addition, gloves were changed in both groups whenever there was a visible puncture. Only outer gloves were investigated.

Contamination was tested by impression of gloved fingers on blood agar and culture plates were subsequently incubated at 37°C for 48 hours. The number of colonies and types of organisms were recorded. Glove perforation was assessed using the water test. The incidence of perforation and contamination was significantly lower in the study group compared with the control group. Changing gloves at regular intervals is an effective way to decrease the incidence of glove perforation and bacterial contamination during total hip arthroplasty.