During the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients continue to require urgent surgery for hip fractures. However, the impact of COVID-19 on perioperative outcomes in these high-risk patients remains unknown. The objectives of this study were to establish the effects of COVID-19 on perioperative morbidity and mortality, and determine any risk factors for increased mortality in patients with COVID-19 undergoing hip fracture surgery. This multicentre cohort study included 340 COVID-19-negative patients versus 82 COVID-19-positive patients undergoing surgical treatment for hip fractures across nine NHS hospitals in Greater London, UK. Patients in both treatment groups were comparable for age, sex, body mass index, fracture configuration, and type of surgery performed. Predefined perioperative outcomes were recorded within a 30-day postoperative period. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify risk factors associated with increased risk of mortality.Aims
Methods
The Unified Classification System (UCS) emphasises
the key principles in the assessment and management of peri-prosthetic
fractures complicating partial or total joint replacement. We tested the inter- and intra-observer agreement for the UCS
as applied to the pelvis and femur using 20 examples of peri-prosthetic
fracture in 17 patients. Each subtype of the UCS was represented
by at least one case. Specialist orthopaedic surgeons (experts)
and orthopaedic residents (pre-experts) assessed reliability on
two separate occasions. For the pelvis, the UCS showed inter-observer agreement of 0.837
(95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.798 to 0.876) for the experts and
0.728 (95% CI 0.689 to 0.767) for the pre-experts. The intra-observer
agreement for the experts was 0.861 (95% CI 0.760 to 0.963) and
0.803 (95% 0.688 to 0.918) for the pre-experts. For the femur, the
UCS showed an inter-observer kappa value of 0.805 (95% CI 0.765
to 0.845) for the experts and a value of 0.732 (95% CI 0.690 to 0.773)
for the pre-experts. The intra-observer agreement was 0.920 (95%
CI 0.867 to 0.973) for the experts, and 0.772 (95% CI 0.652 to 0.892)
for the pre-experts. This corresponds to a substantial and ‘almost
perfect’ inter- and intra-observer agreement for the UCS for peri-prosthetic
fractures of the pelvis and femur. We hope that unifying the terminology of these injuries will
assist in their assessment, treatment and outcome. Cite this article:
We aimed to determine whether cemented hemiarthroplasty
is associated with a higher post-operative mortality and rate of
re-operation when compared with uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Data
on 19 669 patients, who were treated with a hemiarthroplasty following
a fracture of the hip in a nine-year period from 2002 to 2011, were extracted
from NHS Scotland’s acute admission database (Scottish Morbidity
Record, SMR01). We investigated the rate of mortality at day 0,
1, 7, 30, 120 and one-year post-operatively using 12 case-mix variables
to determine the independent effect of the method of fixation. At
day 0, those with a cemented hemiarthroplasty had a higher rate
of mortality (p <
0.001) compared with those with an uncemented
hemiarthroplasty, equivalent to one extra death per 424 procedures.
By day one this had become one extra death per 338 procedures. Increasing
age and the five-year co-morbidity score were noted as independent
risk factors. By day seven, the cumulative rate of mortality was
less for cemented hemiarthroplasty though this did not reach significance
until day 120. The rate of re-operation was significantly higher
for uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Despite adjusting for 12 confounding
variables, these only accounted for 15% of the observed variability. The debate about the choice of the method of fixation for a hemiarthroplasty
with respect to the rate of mortality or the risk of re-operation
may be largely superfluous. Our results suggest that uncemented
hemiarthroplasties may have a role to play in elderly patients with
significant co-morbid disease. Cite this article:
