Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 2, Issue 8 | Pages 162 - 168
1 Aug 2013
Chia PH Gualano L Seevanayagam S Weinberg L

Objectives. To determine the morbidity and mortality outcomes of patients presenting with a fractured neck of femur in an Australian context. Peri-operative variables related to unfavourable outcomes were identified to allow planning of intervention strategies for improving peri-operative care. Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study of 185 consecutive adult patients admitted to an Australian metropolitan teaching hospital with fractured neck of femur between 2009 and 2010. The main outcome measures were 30-day and one-year mortality rates, major complications and factors influencing mortality. . Results. The majority of patients were elderly, female and had multiple comorbidities. Multiple peri-operative medical complications were observed, including pre-operative hypoxia (17%), post-operative delirium (25%), anaemia requiring blood transfusion (28%), representation within 30 days of discharge (18%), congestive cardiac failure (14%), acute renal impairment (12%) and myocardial infarction (4%). Mortality rates were 8.1% at 30 days and 21.6% at one year. Factors predictive of one-year mortality were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (odds ratio (OR) 4.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 12.2)), general anaesthesia (OR 3.1 (95% CI 1.1 to 8.5)), age > 90 years (OR 4.5 (95% CI 1.5 to 13.1)) and post-operative oliguria (OR 3.6 (95% CI 1.1 to 11.7)). Conclusions. Results from an Australian metropolitan teaching hospital confirm the persistently high morbidity and mortality in patients presenting with a fractured neck of femur. Efforts should be aimed at medically optimising patients pre-operatively and correction of pre-operative hypoxia. This study provides planning data for future interventional studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:162–8


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 7 | Pages 368 - 385
1 Jul 2020
Chow SK Chim Y Wang J Wong RM Choy VM Cheung W

A balanced inflammatory response is important for successful fracture healing. The response of osteoporotic fracture healing is deranged and an altered inflammatory response can be one underlying cause. The objectives of this review were to compare the inflammatory responses between normal and osteoporotic fractures and to examine the potential effects on different healing outcomes. A systematic literature search was conducted with relevant keywords in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science independently. Original preclinical studies and clinical studies involving the investigation of inflammatory response in fracture healing in ovariectomized (OVX) animals or osteoporotic/elderly patients with available full text and written in English were included. In total, 14 articles were selected. Various inflammatory factors were reported; of those tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin (IL)-6 are two commonly studied markers. Preclinical studies showed that OVX animals generally demonstrated higher systemic inflammatory response and poorer healing outcomes compared to normal controls (SHAM). However, it is inconclusive if the local inflammatory response is higher or lower in OVX animals. As for clinical studies, they mainly examine the temporal changes of the inflammatory stage or perform comparison between osteoporotic/fragility fracture patients and normal subjects without fracture. Our review of these studies emphasizes the lack of understanding that inflammation plays in the altered fracture healing response of osteoporotic/elderly patients. Taken together, it is clear that additional studies, preclinical and clinical, are required to dissect the regulatory role of inflammatory response in osteoporotic fracture healing.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(7):368–385.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 8 | Pages 508 - 510
1 Aug 2018
Horriat S Haddad FS


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 2 | Pages 113 - 122
1 Feb 2017
Scholes SC Hunt BJ Richardson VM Langton DJ Smith E Joyce TJ

Objectives

The high revision rates of the DePuy Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and the DePuy ASR XL (the total hip arthroplasty (THA) version) have led to questions over the viability of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip joints. Some designs of MoM hip joint do, however, have reasonable mid-term performance when implanted in appropriate patients. Investigations into the reasons for implant failure are important to offer help with the choice of implants and direction for future implant designs. One way to assess the performance of explanted hip prostheses is to measure the wear (in terms of material loss) on the joint surfaces.

Methods

In this study, a coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used to measure the wear on five failed cementless Biomet Magnum/ReCap/ Taperloc large head MoM THAs, along with one Biomet ReCap resurfacing joint. Surface roughness measurements were also taken. The reason for revision of these implants was pain and/or adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) and/or elevated blood metal ion levels.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 3, Issue 5 | Pages 150 - 154
1 May 2014
M. Takamura K Maher P Nath T Su EP

Objectives

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MOMHR) is available as an alternative option for younger, more active patients. There are failure modes that are unique to MOMHR, which include loosening of the femoral head and fractures of the femoral neck. Previous studies have speculated that changes in the vascularity of the femoral head may contribute to these failure modes. This study compares the survivorship between the standard posterior approach (SPA) and modified posterior approach (MPA) in MOMHR.

Methods

A retrospective clinical outcomes study was performed examining 351 hips (279 male, 72 female) replaced with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR, Smith and Nephew, Memphis, Tennessee) in 313 patients with a pre-operative diagnosis of osteoarthritis. The mean follow-up period for the SPA group was 2.8 years (0.1 to 6.1) and for the MPA, 2.2 years (0.03 to 5.2); this difference in follow-up period was statistically significant (p < 0.01). Survival analysis was completed using the Kaplan–Meier method.