Objectives

Degenerative disc disease (DDD) and osteoarthritis (OA) are relatively frequent causes of disability amongst the elderly; they constitute serious socioeconomic costs and significantly impair quality of life. Previous studies to date have found that aggrecan variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) contributes both to DDD and OA. However, current data are not consistent across studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate systematically the relationship between aggrecan VNTR, and DDD and/or OA.

Objectives. The treatment of osteoporotic fractures is a major challenge, and the enhancement of healing is critical as a major goal in modern fracture management. Most osteoporotic fractures occur at the metaphyseal bone region but few models exist and the healing is still poorly understood. A systematic review was conducted to identify and analyse the appropriateness of current osteoporotic metaphyseal fracture animal models. Materials and Methods. A literature search was performed on the Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science databases, and relevant articles were selected. A total of 19 studies were included. Information on the animal, induction of osteoporosis, fracture technique, site and fixation, healing results, and utility of the model were extracted. Results. Fracture techniques included drill hole defects (3 of 19), bone defects (3 of 19), partial osteotomy (1 of 19), and complete osteotomies (12 of 19). Drill hole models and incomplete osteotomy models are easy to perform and allow the study of therapeutic agents but do not represent the usual clinical setting. Additionally, biomaterials can be filled into drill hole defects for analysis. Complete osteotomy models are most commonly used and are best suited for the investigation of therapeutic drugs or noninvasive interventions. The metaphyseal defect models allow the study of biomaterials, which are associated with complex and comminuted osteoporotic fractures. Conclusion. For a clinically relevant model, we propose that an animal model should satisfy the following criteria to study osteoporotic fracture healing: 1) induction of osteoporosis, 2) complete osteotomy or defect at the metaphysis unilaterally, and 3) internal fixation. Cite this article: R. M. Y. Wong, M. H. V. Choy, M. C. M. Li, K-S. Leung, S. K-H. Chow, W-H. Cheung, J. C. Y. Cheng. A systematic review of current osteoporotic metaphyseal fracture animal models. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:6–11. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.71.BJR-2016-0334.R2

Objectives. Microindentation has the potential to measure the stiffness of an individual patient’s bone. Bone stiffness plays a crucial role in the press-fit stability of orthopaedic implants. Arming surgeons with accurate bone stiffness information may reduce surgical complications including periprosthetic fractures. The question addressed with this systematic review is whether microindentation can accurately measure cortical bone stiffness. Methods. A systematic review of all English language articles using a keyword search was undertaken using Medline, Embase, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases. Studies that only used nanoindentation, cancellous bone or animal tissue were excluded. Results. A total of 1094 abstracts were retrieved and 32 papers were included in the analysis, 20 of which used reference point indentation, and 12 of which used traditional depth-sensing indentation. There are several factors that must be considered when using microindentation, such as tip size, depth and method of analysis. Only two studies validated microindentation against traditional mechanical testing techniques. Both studies used reference point indentation (RPI), with one showing that RPI parameters correlate well with mechanical testing, but the other suggested that they do not. Conclusion. Microindentation has been used in various studies to assess bone stiffness, but only two studies with conflicting results compared microindentation with traditional mechanical testing techniques. Further research, including more studies comparing microindentation with other mechanical testing methods, is needed before microindentation can be used reliably to calculate cortical bone stiffness. Cite this article: M. Arnold, S. Zhao, S. Ma, F. Giuliani, U. Hansen, J. P. Cobb, R. L. Abel, O. Boughton. Microindentation – a tool for measuring cortical bone stiffness? A systematic review. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:542–549. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.69.BJR-2016-0317.R2

Objectives. Osteoporosis has become an increasing concern for older people as it may potentially lead to osteoporotic fractures. This study is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ten therapies for post-menopausal women using network meta-analysis. Methods. We conducted a systematic search in several databases, including PubMed and Embase. A random-effects model was employed and results were assessed by the odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Furthermore, with respect to each outcome, each intervention was ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value. Results. With respect to preventing new vertebral fractures (NVF), all ten drugs outperformed placebo, and etidronate proved to be the most effective treatment (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.39). In addition, zoledronic acid and parathyroid hormone ranked higher compared with the other drugs. With respect to preventing clinical vertebral fractures (CVF), zoledronic acid proved to be the most effective drug (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.92), with denosumab as a desirable second option (OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96), when both were compared with placebo. As for adverse events (AE) and severe adverse events (SAE), no significant difference was observed. According to SUCRA, etidronate ranked first in preventing CVF; parathyroid hormone and zoledronic acid ranked highly in preventing NVF and CVF. Raloxifene was safe with a high rank in preventing AEs and SAEs though performed unsatisfactorily in efficacy. Conclusions. This study suggests that, taking efficacy and safety into account, parathyroid hormone and zoledronic acid had the highest probability of satisfactory performance in preventing osteoporotic fractures. Cite this article: G. Wang, L. Sui, P. Gai, G. Li, X. Qi, X. Jiang. The efficacy and safety of vertebral fracture prevention therapies in post-menopausal osteoporosis treatment: Which therapies work best? a network meta-analysis. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:452–463. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.67.BJR-2016-0292.R1

Objectives. Despite the fact that research fraud and misconduct are under scrutiny in the field of orthopaedic research, little systematic work has been done to uncover and characterise the underlying reasons for academic retractions in this field. The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of retractions and identify the reasons for retracted publications in the orthopaedic literature. Methods. Two reviewers independently searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (1995 to current) using MeSH keyword headings and the ‘retracted’ filter. We also searched an independent website that reports and archives retracted scientific publications (. www.retractionwatch.com. ). Two reviewers independently extracted data including reason for retraction, study type, journal impact factor, and country of origin. Results. One hundred and ten retracted studies were included for data extraction. The retracted studies were published in journals with impact factors ranging from 0.000 (discontinued journals) to 13.262. In the 20-year search window, only 25 papers were retracted in the first ten years, with the remaining 85 papers retracted in the most recent decade. The most common reasons for retraction were fraudulent data (29), plagiarism (25) and duplicate publication (20). Retracted articles have been cited up to 165 times (median 6; interquartile range 2 to 19). Conclusion. The rate of retractions in the orthopaedic literature is increasing, with the majority of retractions attributed to academic misconduct and fraud. Orthopaedic retractions originate from numerous journals and countries, indicating that misconduct issues are widespread. The results of this study highlight the need to address academic integrity when training the next generation of orthopaedic investigators. Cite this article: J. Yan, A. MacDonald, L-P. Baisi, N. Evaniew, M. Bhandari, M. Ghert. Retractions in orthopaedic research: A systematic review. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:263–268. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.56.BJR-2016-0047

Objectives

To review the systemic impact of smoking on bone healing as evidenced within the orthopaedic literature.

Objectives

We aimed first to summarise minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) after total hip (THR) or knee replacement (TKR) in health-related quality of life (HRQoL), measured using the Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Secondly, we aimed to improve the precision of MCID estimates by means of meta-analysis.