header advert
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 2 | Pages 47 - 49
1 Apr 2024
Burden EG Krause T Evans JP Whitehouse MR Evans JT


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 11 | Pages 631 - 639
1 Nov 2017
Blyth MJG Anthony I Rowe P Banger MS MacLean A Jones B

Objectives

This study reports on a secondary exploratory analysis of the early clinical outcomes of a randomised clinical trial comparing robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee with manual UKA performed using traditional surgical jigs. This follows reporting of the primary outcomes of implant accuracy and gait analysis that showed significant advantages in the robotic arm-assisted group.

Methods

A total of 139 patients were recruited from a single centre. Patients were randomised to receive either a manual UKA implanted with the aid of traditional surgical jigs, or a UKA implanted with the aid of a tactile guided robotic arm-assisted system. Outcome measures included the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score, Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale, Short Form-12, Pain Catastrophising Scale, somatic disease (Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Score), Pain visual analogue scale, analgesic use, patient satisfaction, complications relating to surgery, 90-day pain diaries and the requirement for revision surgery.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 9 | Pages 566 - 571
1 Sep 2017
Cheng T Zhang X Hu J Li B Wang Q

Objectives. Surgeons face a substantial risk of infection because of the occupational exposure to blood-borne pathogens (BBPs) from patients undergoing high-risk orthopaedic procedures. This study aimed to determine the seroprevalence of four BBPs among patients undergoing joint arthroplasty in Shanghai, China. In addition, we evaluated the significance of pre-operative screening by calculating a cost-to-benefit ratio. Methods. A retrospective observational study of pre-operative screening for BBPs, including hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV and HCV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and Treponema pallidum (TP), was conducted for sequential patients in the orthopaedic department of a large urban teaching hospital between 01 January 2009 and 30 May 2016. Medical records were analysed to verify the seroprevalence of these BBPs among the patients stratified by age, gender, local origin, type of surgery, history of previous transfusion and marital status. Results. Of the subjects who underwent arthroplasty surgery in our institution, pre-operative screening tests were available for 96.1% (11 609 patients). The seroprevalence of HBV, HCV, HIV and TP was 5.47%, 0.45%, 0.08% and 3.6%, respectively. A total of 761 seropositive cases (68.4%) were previously undiagnosed. Pre-operative screening for HIV resulted in a low cost to benefit ratio, followed by HCV and HBV. Conclusion. Routine HCV and HIV screening prior to joint arthroplasty is not a cost-effective strategy. Considering the high rate of undiagnosed patients and the shortage of protective options, targeted pre-operative screening for HBV and syphilis should be considered for the protection of healthcare workers in China who have not been vaccinated. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2017;6:566–571


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 8 | Pages 499 - 505
1 Aug 2017
Morrison RJM Tsang B Fishley W Harper I Joseph JC Reed MR

Objectives

We have increased the dose of tranexamic acid (TXA) in our enhanced total joint recovery protocol at our institution from 15 mg/kg to 30 mg/kg (maximum 2.5 g) as a single, intravenous (IV) dose. We report the clinical effect of this dosage change.

Methods

We retrospectively compared two cohorts of consecutive patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery in our unit between 2008 and 2013. One group received IV TXA 15 mg/kg, maximum 1.2 g, and the other 30 mg/kg, maximum 2.5 g as a single pre-operative dose. The primary outcome for this study was the requirement for blood transfusion within 30 days of surgery. Secondary measures included length of hospital stay, critical care requirements, re-admission rate, medical complications and mortality rates.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 3, Issue 1 | Pages 14 - 19
1 Jan 2014
James SJ Mirza SB Culliford DJ Taylor PA Carr AJ Arden NK

Aims. Osteoporosis and abnormal bone metabolism may prove to be significant factors influencing the outcome of arthroplasty surgery, predisposing to complications of aseptic loosening and peri-prosthetic fracture. We aimed to investigate baseline bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover in patients about to undergo arthroplasty of the hip and knee. Methods. We prospectively measured bone mineral density of the hip and lumbar spine using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans in a cohort of 194 patients awaiting hip or knee arthroplasty. We also assessed bone turnover using urinary deoxypyridinoline (DPD), a type I collagen crosslink, normalised to creatinine. Results. The prevalence of DEXA proven hip osteoporosis (T-score ≤ -2.5) among hip and knee arthroplasty patients was found to be low at 2.8% (4 of 143). Spinal osteoporosis prevalence was higher at 6.9% (12 of 175). Sixty patients (42% (60 of 143)) had osteopenia or osteoporosis of either the hip or spine. The mean T-score for the hip was -0.34 (. sd. 1.23), which is within normal limits, and the mean hip Z-score was positive at 0.87 (. sd. 1.17), signifying higher-than-average BMD for age. The median urinary DPD/creatinine was raised in both female patients at 8.1 (interquartile range (IQR) 6.6 to 9.9) and male patients at 6.2 (IQR 4.8 to 7.5). Conclusions. Our results indicate hip and knee arthroplasty patients have higher BMD of the hip and spine compared with an age-matched general population, and a lower prevalence of osteoporosis. However, untreated osteoporotic patients are undergoing arthroplasty, which may negatively impact their outcome. Raised DPD levels suggest abnormal bone turnover, requiring further investigation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:14–19


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 2, Issue 3 | Pages 58 - 65
1 Mar 2013
Johnson R Jameson SS Sanders RD Sargant NJ Muller SD Meek RMD Reed MR

Objectives

To review the current best surgical practice and detail a multi-disciplinary approach that could further reduce joint replacement infection.

Methods

Review of relevant literature indexed in PubMed.