Optimal exposure through the direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) conducted on a regular operating theatre table is achieved with a standardized capsular releasing sequence in which the anterior capsule can be preserved or resected. We hypothesized that clinical outcomes and implant positioning would not be different in case a capsular sparing (CS) technique would be compared to capsular resection (CR). In this prospective trial, 219 hips in 190 patients were randomized to either the CS (n = 104) or CR (n = 115) cohort. In the CS cohort, a medial based anterior flap was created and sutured back in place at the end of the procedure. The anterior capsule was resected in the CR cohort. Primary outcome was defined as the difference in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after one year. PROMs (Harris Hip Score (HHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and Short Form 36 Item Health Survey (SF-36)) were collected preoperatively and one year postoperatively. Radiological parameters were analyzed to assess implant positioning and implant ingrowth. Adverse events were monitored.Aims
Methods
Although periarticular injection plays an important role in multimodal pain management following total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is no consensus on the optimal composition of the injection. In particular, it is not clear whether the addition of a corticosteroid improves the pain relief achieved nor whether it is associated with more complications than are observed without corticosteroid. The aim of this study was to quantify the safety and effectiveness of cortocosteroid use in periarticular injection during THA. We conducted a prospective, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving patients scheduled for unilateral THA. A total of 187 patients were randomly assigned to receive periarticular injection containing either a corticosteroid (CS group) or without corticosteroid (no-CS group). Other perioperative interventions were identical for all patients. The primary outcome was postoperative pain at rest during the initial 24 hours after surgery. Pain score was recorded every three hours until 24 hours using a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). The primary outcome was assessed based on the area under the curve (AUC).Aims
Methods
Intravenous dexamethasone has been shown to reduce immediate postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty (THA), though the effects are short-lived. We aimed to assess whether two equivalent perioperative split doses were more effective than a single preoperative dose. A total of 165 patients were randomly assigned into three groups: two perioperative saline injections (Group A, placebo), a single preoperative dose of 20 mg dexamethasone and a postoperative saline injection (Group B), and two perioperative doses of 10 mg dexamethasone (Group C). Patients, surgeons, and staff collecting outcome data were blinded to allocation. The primary outcome was postoperative pain level reported on a ten-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at rest and during activity. The use of analgesic and antiemetic rescue, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), CRP and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels, range of motion (ROM), length of stay (LOS), patient satisfaction, and the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in the three months postoperatively, were also compared.Aims
Methods
The primary purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether statin usage could reduce the risk of glucocorticoid-related osteonecrosis in animal models. A systematic literature search up to May 2015 was carried out using the PubMed, Ovid, EBM reviews, ISI Web of Science, EBSCO, CBM, CNKI databases with the term and boolean operators: statins and osteonecrosis in all fields. Risk ratio (RR), as the risk estimate of specific outcome, was calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The methodological quality of individual studies was assessed using a quantitative tool based on the updated Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) recommendations.Objectives
Methods
Using a systematic review, we investigated whether there is an
increased risk of post-operative infection in patients who have
received an intra-articular corticosteroid injection to the hip
for osteoarthritis prior to total hip arthroplasty (THA). Studies dealing with an intra-articular corticosteroid injection
to the hip and infection following subsequent THA were identified
from databases for the period between 1990 to 2013. Retrieved articles
were independently assessed for their methodological quality.Aims
Methods
The outcome after total hip replacement has improved
with the development of surgical techniques, better pain management
and the introduction of enhanced recovery pathways. These pathways
require a multidisciplinary team to manage pre-operative education,
multimodal pain control and accelerated rehabilitation. The current economic
climate and restricted budgets favour brief hospitalisation while
minimising costs. This has put considerable pressure on hospitals
to combine excellent results, early functional recovery and shorter
admissions. In this review we present an evidence-based summary of some common
interventions and methods, including pre-operative patient education,
pre-emptive analgesia, local infiltration analgesia, pre-operative
nutrition, the use of pulsed electromagnetic fields, peri-operative
rehabilitation, wound dressings, different surgical techniques, minimally
invasive surgery and fast-track joint replacement units. Cite this article:
Immunosuppression following intra-articular injections of steroid into the hip may interfere with asepsis in a subsequent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We have undertaken a retrospective, matched, cohort study of infective complications after THA, in 40 patients who had received such an injection and 40 who had not. In the injection group there were five revisions, four of which were for deep infection. There were none in the matched group. The overall rate of revision in our database of 979 primary THAs was 1.02%. Six additional patients who had received injections underwent investigation for infection because of persistent problems in the hip as compared with one in the control group.
