Aims. Day-case arthroplasty is gaining popularity in Europe. We report outcomes from the first 12 months following implementation of a day-case pathway for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in an NHS hospital. Methods. A total of 47 total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 24 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) patients were selected for the day-case arthroplasty pathway, based on preoperative fitness and agreement to participate. Data were likewise collected for a matched control group (n = 58) who followed the standard pathway three months prior to the implementation of the day-case pathway. We report same-day discharge (SDD) success, reasons for delayed discharge, and patient-reported outcomes. Overall length of stay (LOS) for all lower limb arthroplasty was recorded to determine the wider impact of implementing a day-case pathway. Results. Patients on the day-case pathway achieved SDD in 47% (22/47) of THAs and 67% (16/24) of UKAs. The most common reasons for failed SDD were nausea, hypotension, and pain, which were strongly associated with the use of fentanyl in the spinal anaesthetic. Complications and patient-reported outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Following the introduction of the day-case pathway, the mean LOS reduced significantly by 0.7, 0.6, and 0.5 days respectively in THA, UKA, and total knee arthroplasty cases (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Day-case pathways are feasible in an NHS set-up with only small changes required. We do not recommend fentanyl in the spinal anaesthetic for day-case patients. An important benefit seen in our unit is the so-called ‘day-case effect’, with a significant reduction in mean LOS seen across all lower limb arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):900–908

Aims

This study aimed to evaluate whether an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) for arthroplasty established during the COVID-19 pandemic at a safety net hospital can be associated with a decrease in hospital length of stay (LOS) and an increase in same-day discharges (SDDs) without increasing acute adverse events.

Aims

Recent improvements in surgical technique and perioperative blood management after total joint replacement (TJR) have decreased rates of transfusion. However, as many surgeons transition to outpatient TJR, obtaining routine postoperative blood tests becomes more challenging. Therefore, we sought to determine if a preoperative outpatient assessment tool that stratifies patients based on numerous medical comorbidities could predict who required postoperative haemoglobin (Hb) measurement.

Aims

Antifibrinolytic agents, including tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA), have been shown to be safe and effective for decreasing perioperative blood loss and transfusion following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there are few prospective studies that directly compare these agents. The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits of intraoperative intravenous TXA with EACA.

Older patients with multiple medical co-morbidities are increasingly being offered and undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA). These patients are more likely to require intensive care support, following surgery. We prospectively evaluated the need for intensive care admission and intervention in a consecutive series of 738 patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty procedures. The mean age was 60.6 years (18 to 91; 440 women, 298 men. Risk factors, correlating with the need for critical care intervention, according to published guidelines, were analysed to identify high-risk patients who would benefit from post-operative critical care monitoring. A total of 50 patients (6.7%) in our series required critical care level interventions during their hospital stay. Six independent multivariate clinical predictors were identified (p < 0.001) including a history of congestive heart failure (odds ratio (OR) 24.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.51 to 61.91), estimated blood loss >  1000 mL (OR 17.36, 95% CI 5.36 to 56.19), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13.90, 95% CI 4.78 to 40.36), intra-operative use of vasopressors (OR 8.10, 95% CI 3.23 to 20.27), revision hip arthroplasty (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.04) and body mass index > 35 kg/m² (OR 2.70, 95% CI 123 to 5.94). The model was then validated against an independent, previously published data set of 1594 consecutive patients. The use of this risk stratification model can be helpful in predicting which high-risk patients would benefit from a higher level of monitoring and care after elective TJA and aid hospitals in allocating precious critical care resources.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1512–18.

We hypothesised there was no clinical value in using an autologous blood transfusion (ABT) drain in either primary total hip (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) in terms of limiting allogeneic blood transfusions when a modern restrictive blood management regime was followed. A total of 575 patients (65.2% men), with a mean age of 68.9 years (36 to 94) were randomised in this three-arm study to no drainage (group A), or to wound drainage with an ABT drain for either six hours (group B) or 24 hours (group C). The primary outcome was the number of patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion. Secondary outcomes were post-operative haemoglobin (Hb) levels, length of hospital stay and adverse events.

This study identified only 41 transfused patients, with no significant difference in distribution between the three groups (p = 0.857). The mean pre-operative haemoglobin (Hb) value in the transfused group was 12.8 g/dL (9.8 to 15.5) versus 14.3 g/dL (10.6 to 18.0) in the non-transfused group (p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval: 1.08 to 1.86). Post-operatively, the median of re-transfused shed blood in patients with a THR was 280 mL (Interquartile range (IQR) 150 to 400) and in TKR patients 500 mL (IQR 350 to 650) (p <  0.001). ABT drains had no effect on the proportion of transfused patients in primary THR and TKR. The secondary outcomes were also comparable between groups.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:765–71.

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative efficacy of regional and general anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement. A comprehensive search for relevant studies was performed in PubMed (1966 to April 2008), EMBASE (1969 to April 2008) and the Cochrane Library. Only randomised studies comparing regional and general anaesthesia for total hip or knee replacement were included.

We identified 21 independent, randomised clinical trials. A random-effects model was used to calculate all effect sizes. Pooled results from these trials showed that regional anaesthesia reduces the operating time (odds ratio (OR) −0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.33 to −0.05), the need for transfusion (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.94) and the incidence of thromboembolic disease (deep-vein thrombosis OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.84; pulmonary embolism OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.80).

Regional anaesthesia therefore seems to improve the outcome of patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement.

Tranexamic acid is a fibrinolytic inhibitor which reduces blood loss in total knee replacement. We examined the effect on blood loss of a standardised intravenous bolus dose of 1 g of tranexamic acid, given at the induction of anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip replacement and tested the potential prothrombotic effect by undertaking routine venography. In all, 36 patients received 1 g of tranexamic acid, and 37 no tranexamic acid. Blood loss was measured directly per-operatively and indirectly post-operatively.

Tranexamic acid reduced the early post-operative blood loss and total blood loss (p = 0.03 and p = 0.008, respectively) but not the intraoperative blood loss. The tranexamic acid group required fewer transfusions (p = 0.03) and had no increased incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. The reduction in early post-operative blood loss was more marked in women (p = 0.05), in whom this effect was dose-related (r = −0.793).

Our study showed that the administration of a standardised pre-operative bolus of 1 g of tranexamic acid was cost-effective in reducing the blood loss and transfusion requirements after total hip replacement, especially in women.

The routine use of surgical drains in total hip arthroplasty remains controversial. They have not been shown to decrease the rate of wound infection significantly and can provide a retrograde route for it. Their use does not reduce the size or incidence of post-operative wound haematomas. This prospective, randomised study was designed to evaluate the role of drains in routine total hip arthroplasty.

We investigated 552 patients (577 hips) undergoing unilateral or bilateral total hip arthroplasty who had been randomised to either having a drain for 24 hours or not having a drain. All patients followed standardised pre-, intra-, and post-operative regimes and were independently assessed using the Harris hip score before operation and at six, 18 and 36 months follow-up.

The rate of superficial and deep infection was 2.9% and 0.4%, respectively, in the drained group and 4.8% and 0.7%, respectively in the undrained group. One patient in the undrained group had a haematoma which did not require drainage or transfusion. The rate of transfusion after operation in the drained group was significantly higher than for undrained procedures (p < 0.042). The use of a drain did not influence the post-operative levels of haemoglobin, the revision rates, Harris hip scores, the length of hospital stay or the incidence of thromboembolism. We conclude that drains provide no clear advantage at total hip arthroplasty, represent an additional cost, and expose patients to a higher risk of transfusion.

The newer techniques of cementing aim to improve interlock between cement and bone around a femoral stem by combining high pressure and reduced viscosity. This may produce increased embolisation of fat and marrow leading to hypotension, impaired pulmonary gas exchange and death. For this reason the use of high pressures has been questioned. We compared finger-packing with the use of a cement gun by measuring intramedullary pressures during the cementing of 31 total hip replacements and measuring physiological changes in 19 patients. We also measured pressure in more detail in a laboratory model. In the clinical series the higher pressures were produced by using a gun, but this caused less physiological disturbance than finger-packing. The laboratory studies showed more consistent results with the gun technique, but for both methods of cementing the highest pressures were generated during the insertion of the stem of the prosthesis