We have analysed a number of radiological measurements in an attempt to clarify the predisposing factors for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbosacral junction. We identified 57 patients with a slip and a control group of 293 patients without any radiological abnormality apart from age-related changes. The relative thickness of the L5 transverse process, the sacral table angle and the height of the iliac crest were measured and evaluated. The difference in these measurements between men and women was analysed in the control group. We found that the transverse process of L5 was extremely slender, the sacral table more inclined, and the L5 vertebra was less deeply placed in the pelvis in patients with a slip compared with the control group. The differences in these three parameters were statistically significant. We believe that the L5 vertebra is predisposed to slip when these factors act together on a rigidly-stabilised sacrum. This occurs more commonly in women, probably as a result of constitutional differences in the development of the male and female spine.
The aim of this study was to determine whether the foundation programme for junior doctors, implemented across the United Kingdom in 2005, provides adequate training in musculoskeletal medicine. We recruited 112 doctors on completion of their foundation programme and assessed them using the Freedman and Bernstein musculoskeletal examination tool. Only 8.9% passed the assessment. Those with exposure to orthopaedics, with a career interest in orthopaedics, and who felt that they had gained adequate exposure to musculoskeletal medicine obtained significantly higher scores. Those interested in general practice as a career obtained significantly lower scores. Only 15% had any exposure to orthopaedics during the foundation programme and only 13% felt they had adequate exposure to musculoskeletal medicine. The foundation programme currently provides inadequate training in musculoskeletal medicine. The quality and quantity of exposure to musculoskeletal medicine during the foundation programme must be improved.
We present the early clinical and radiological results of Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) resurfacings in 214 hips (192 patients) with a mean follow-up of 43 months (30 to 57). The mean age of the patients was 56 years (28 to 74) and 85 hips (40%) were in 78 women. The mean Harris hip score improved from 52 (11 to 81) to 95 (27 to 100) at two years and the mean University of California, Los Angeles activity score from 3.9 (1 to 10) to 7.4 (2 to 10) in the same period. Narrowing of the neck (to a maximum of 9%) was noted in 124 of 209 hips (60%). There were 12 revisions (5.6%) involving four (1.9%) early fractures of the femoral neck and two (0.9%) episodes of collapse of the femoral head secondary to avascular necrosis. Six patients (2.8%) had failure related to metal wear debris. The overall survival for our series was 93% (95% confidence interval 80 to 98) and 89% (95% confidence interval 82 to 96) for hips with acetabular components smaller than 56 mm in diameter. The ASR implant has a lower diametrical clearance and a subhemispherical acetabular component when compared with other more frequently implanted metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. These changes may contribute to the higher failure rate than in other series, compared with other designs. Given our poor results with the small components we are no longer implanting the smaller size.
Thromboprophylaxis remains a controversial subject. A vast amount of epidemiological and trial data about venous thromboembolism has been published over the past 40 years. These data have been distilled and synthesised into guidelines designed to help the practitioner translate this extensive research into ‘evidence-based’ advice. Guidelines should, in theory, benefit patient care by ensuring that every patient routinely receives the best prophylaxis; without guidelines, it is argued, patients may fail to receive treatment or be exposed to protocols which are ineffective, dangerous or expensive. Guidelines, however, have not been welcomed or applied universally. In the United States, orthopaedic surgeons have published their concerns about the thromboprophylaxis guidelines prepared by the American College of Chest Physicians. In Britain, controversy persists with many surgeons unconvinced of the risk/benefit, cost/benefit or practicality of thromboprophylaxis. The extended remit of the recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence thromboprophylaxis guidelines has been challenged. The reasons for this disquiet are addressed in this paper and particular emphasis is placed on how clinically-acceptable guidelines could be developed and applied.
We undertook a randomised controlled trial to compare the outcomes of skin adhesive and staples for skin closure in total hip replacement. The primary outcome was the cosmetic appearance of the scar at three months using a surgeon-rated visual analogue scale. In all, 90 patients were randomised to skin closure using either skin adhesive (n = 45) or staples (n = 45). Data on demographics, surgical details, infection and oozing were collected during the in-patient stay. Further data on complications, patient satisfaction and evaluation of cosmesis were collected at three-month follow-up, and a photograph of the scar was taken. An orthopaedic and a plastic surgeon independently evaluated the cosmetic appearance of the scars from the photographs. No significant difference was found between groups in the cosmetic appearance of scars at three months (p = 0.172), the occurrence of complications (p = 0.3), or patient satisfaction (p = 0.42). Staples were quicker and easier to use than skin adhesive and also less expensive. Skin adhesive and surgical staples are both effective skin closure methods in total hip replacement.
We identified 148 patients who had undergone a revision total knee replacement using a single implant system between 1990 and 2000. Of these 18 patients had died, six had developed a peri-prosthetic fracture and ten had incomplete records or radiographs. This left 114 with prospectively-collected radiographs and Bristol knee scores available for study. The height of the joint line before and after revision total knee replacement was measured and classified as either restored to within 5 mm of the pre-operative height or elevated if it was positioned more than 5 mm above the pre-operative height. The joint line was elevated in 41 knees (36%) and restored in 73 (64%). Revision surgery significantly improved the mean Bristol knee score from 41.1 ( Our findings show that restoration of the joint line at revision total knee replacement gives a significantly better result than leaving it unrestored by more than 5 mm. We recommend the greater use of distal femoral augments to help to achieve this goal.
Comparison of the safety and efficacy of bilateral simultaneous total hip replacement (THR) and that of staged bilateral THR and unilateral THR was conducted using DerSimonian-Laird heterogeneity meta-analysis. A review of the English-language literature identified 23 citations eligible for inclusion. A total of 2063 bilateral simultaneous THR patients were identified. Meta-analysis of homogeneous data revealed no statistically significant differences in the rates of thromboembolic events (p = 0.268 and p = 0.365) and dislocation (p = 0.877) when comparing staged or unilateral with bilateral simultaneous THR procedures. A systematic analysis of heterogeneous data demonstrated that the mean length of hospital stay was shorter after bilateral simultaneous THR. Higher blood transfusion requirements were expected following bilateral simultaneous THR than staged or unilateral THR, and surgical time was not different between groups. This procedure was also found to be economically and functionally efficacious when performed by experienced surgeons in specialist centres.
The majority of patients with osteoarthritis present to orthopaedic surgeons seeking relief of pain and associated restoration of function. Although our understanding of the physiology of pain has improved greatly over the last 25 years there remain a number of unexplained pain-related observations in patients with osteoarthritis. The understanding of pain in osteoarthritis, its modulation and treatment is central to orthopaedic clinical practice and in this annotation we explore some of the current concepts applicable. We also introduce the concept of the ‘phantom joint’ as a cause for persistent pain after joint replacement.
This paper describes how we came to understand the pathophysiology of Volkmann’s ischaemic contracture with references to relevant papers in this Journal, and the investigation and management of acute compartment syndrome is briefly discussed.
We describe a retrospective review of the clinical and radiological parameters of 32 feet in 30 patients (10 men and 20 women) who underwent correction for malalignment of the hindfoot with a modified double arthrodesis through a medial approach. The mean follow-up was 21 months (13 to 37). Fusion was achieved in all feet at a mean of 13 weeks (6 to 30). Apart from the calcaneal pitch angle, all angular measurements improved significantly after surgery. Primary wound healing occurred without complications. The isolated medial approach to the subtalar and talonavicular joints allows good visualisation which facilitated the reduction and positioning of the joints. It was also associated with fewer problems with wound healing than the standard lateral approach.
Randomised controlled trials represent the gold standard in the evaluation of outcome of treatment. They are needed because differences between treatment effects have been minimised and observational studies may give a biased estimation of the outcome. However, conducting this kind of trial is challenging. Several methodological issues, including patient or surgeon preference, blinding, surgical standardisation, as well as external validity, have to be addressed in order to lower the risk of bias. Specific tools have been developed in order to take into account the specificity of evaluation of the literature on non-pharmacological intervention. A better knowledge of methodological issues will allow the orthopaedic surgeon to conduct more appropriate studies and to better appraise the limits of his intervention.
