Over the past 30 years there have been many improvements in implant fixation, correction of deformity, improved polyethylene wear, and survival after knee replacement. The work over the last decade has focused on less invasive surgical techniques, multimodal pain management protocols, more rapid functional recovery and reduced length of stay, aiming to minimise the side effects of treatment while maintaining function and implant durability. When combined and standardised these pre-, intra- and post-operative factors have now facilitated outpatient knee replacement procedures for unicompartmental replacement, patella femoral arthroplasty and total knee replacement (TKR). We have found liposomal bupivacaine, with potential for longer therapeutic action, to be a helpful adjunct and describe our current pain management program. The next step in our multimodal program is to improve the duration of patient satisfaction and reduce cost and length of stay after TKR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):7–9

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal regimen for the management of pain following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by comparing the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of different protocols implemented at a large, urban, academic medical centre. Patients and Methods. Between September 2013 and September 2015, we used a series of modifications to our standard regimen for the management of pain after TKA. In May 2014, there was a department-wide transition from protocols focused on femoral nerve blocks (FNB) to periarticular injections of liposomal bupivacaine. In February 2015, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) was removed from the protocol while continuing liposomal bupivacaine injections. Quality measures and hospital costs were compared between the three protocols. Results. The cohort being treated with PCA-less liposomal bupivacaine injections had a significantly higher percentage of patients who were discharged to their home (p = 0.010) and a significantly shorter length of stay (p < 0.001). Patient-reported Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores relating to pain being “well-controlled” and “overall pain management” also favoured this cohort (p = 0.214 and p = 0.463, respectively), in which cost was significantly lower compared with the other two cohorts (p = 0.005). Conclusion. The replacement of FNBs injections and the removal of PCAs, both of which are known to be associated with high rates of adverse outcomes, and the addition of liposomal bupivacaine periarticular injections to a multimodal pain regimen, led to improvements in many quality measures, HCAHPS pain scores, and cost-effectiveness. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B(1 Supple A):55–61

The December 2023 Children’s orthopaedics Roundup. 360. looks at: A comprehensive nonoperative treatment protocol for developmental dysplasia of the hip in infants; How common are refractures in childhood?; Femoral nailing for paediatric femoral shaft fracture in children aged eight to ten years; Who benefits from allowing the physis to grow in slipped capital femoral epiphysis?; Paediatric patients with an extremity bone tumour: a secondary analysis of the PARITY trial data; Split tibial tendon transfers in cerebral palsy equinovarus foot deformities; Liposomal bupivacaine nerve block: an answer to opioid use?; Correction with distal femoral transphyseal screws in hemiepiphysiodesis for coronal-plane knee deformity

Aims. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) as part of a periarticular injection protocol continues to be a highly debated topic in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We evaluated the effect of discontinuing the use of LB in a periarticular protocol on immediate postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, and objective functional outcomes. Methods. On 1 July 2019, we discontinued the use of intraoperative LB as part of a periarticular injection protocol. A consecutive group of patients who received LB as part of the protocol (Protocol 1) and a subsequent group who did not (Protocol 2) were compared. All patients received the same opioid-sparing protocol. Verbal rating scale (VRS) pain scores were collected from our electronic data warehouse and averaged per patient per 12-hour interval. Events relating to the opiate administration were derived as morphine milligram equivalences (MMEs) per patient per 24-hour interval. The Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) tool was used to assess the immediate postoperative function. Results. A total of 888 patients received Protocol 1 and while 789 received Protocol 2. The mean age of the patients was significantly higher in those who did not receive LB (66.80 vs 65.57 years, p = 0.006). The sex, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score, race, smoking status, marital status, operating time, length of stay, and discharge disposition were similar in the two groups. Compared with the LB group, discontinuing LB showed no significant difference in postoperative VRS pain scores up to 72 hours (p > 0.05), opioid administration up to 96 hours (p > 0.05), or AM-PAC scores within the first 24 hours (p > 0.05). Conclusion. The control of pain after TKA with a multimodal management protocol is not improved by the addition of LB compared with traditional bupivacaine. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):102–107

Aims

Single-shot adductor canal block (ACB) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for postoperative analgesia is a common modality. Patients can experience breakthrough pain when the effect of ACB wears off. Local anaesthetic infusion through an intra-articular catheter (IAC) can help manage breakthrough pain after TKA. We hypothesized that combined ACB with ropivacaine infusion through IAC is associated with better pain relief compared to ACB used alone.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a major orthopaedic intervention. The length of a patient's stay has been progressively reduced with the introduction of enhanced recovery protocols: day-case surgery has become the ultimate challenge.

This narrative review shows the potential limitations of day-case TKA. These constraints may be social, linked to patient’s comorbidities, or due to surgery-related adverse events (e.g. pain, post-operative nausea and vomiting, etc.).

Using patient stratification, tailored surgical techniques and multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia, day-case TKA might be achievable in a limited group of patients. The younger, male patient without comorbidities and with an excellent social network around him might be a candidate.

Demographic changes, effective recovery programmes and less invasive surgical techniques such as unicondylar knee arthroplasty, may increase the size of the group of potential day-case patients.

The cost reduction achieved by day-case TKA needs to be balanced against any increase in morbidity and mortality and the cost of advanced follow-up at a distance with new technology. These factors need to be evaluated before adopting this ultimate ‘fast-track’ approach.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):40–4.