Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 241 - 260 of 1225
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 10, Issue 1 | Pages 22 - 30
1 Jan 2021
Clement ND Gaston P Bell A Simpson P Macpherson G Hamilton DF Patton JT

Aims. The primary aim of this study was to compare the hip-specific functional outcome of robotic assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) with manual total hip arthroplasty (mTHA) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Secondary aims were to compare general health improvement, patient satisfaction, and radiological component position and restoration of leg length between rTHA and mTHA. Methods. A total of 40 patients undergoing rTHA were propensity score matched to 80 patients undergoing mTHA for OA. Patients were matched for age, sex, and preoperative function. The Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) were collected pre- and postoperatively (mean 10 months (SD 2.2) in rTHA group and 12 months (SD 0.3) in mTHA group). In addition, patient satisfaction was collected postoperatively. Component accuracy was assessed using Lewinnek and Callanan safe zones, and restoration of leg length were assessed radiologically. Results. There were no significant differences in the preoperative demographics (p ≥ 0.781) or function (p ≥ 0.383) between the groups. The postoperative OHS (difference 2.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1 to 4.8; p = 0.038) and FJS (difference 21.1, 95% CI 10.7 to 31.5; p < 0.001) were significantly greater in the rTHA group when compared with the mTHA group. However, only the FJS was clinically significantly greater. There was no difference in the postoperative EQ-5D (difference 0.017, 95% CI -0.042 to 0.077; p = 0.562) between the two groups. No patients were dissatisfied in the rTHA group whereas six were dissatisfied in the mTHA group, but this was not significant (p = 0.176). rTHA was associated with an overall greater rate of component positioning in a safe zone (p ≤ 0.003) and restoration of leg length (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Patients undergoing rTHA had a greater hip-specific functional outcome when compared to mTHA, which may be related to improved component positioning and restoration of leg length. However, there was no difference in their postoperative generic health or rate of satisfaction. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(1):22–30


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1620 - 1628
1 Dec 2020
Klug A Nagy A Gramlich Y Hoffmann R

Aims. To evaluate the outcomes of terrible triad injuries (TTIs) in mid-term follow-up and determine whether surgical treatment of the radial head influences clinical and radiological outcomes. Methods. Follow-up assessment of 88 patients with TTI (48 women, 40 men; mean age 57 years (18 to 82)) was performed after a mean of 4.5 years (2.0 to 9.4). The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score were evaluated. Radiographs of all patients were analyzed. Fracture types included 13 Mason type I, 16 type II, and 59 type III. Surgical treatment consisted of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in all type II and reconstructable type III fractures, while radial head arthroplasty (RHA) was performed if reconstruction was not possible. Results. At follow-up the mean MEPS was 87.1 (20 to 100); mean OES, 36.9 (6 to 48); and mean DASH score, 18.6 (0 to 90). Mean movement was 118° (30° to 150°) for extension to flexion and 162° (90° to 180°) for pronation to supination. The overall reoperation rate was 24%, with nine ORIF, ten RHA, and two patients without treatment to the radial head needing surgical revision. When treated with RHA, Mason type III fractures exhibited significantly inferior outcomes. Suboptimal results were also identified in patients with degenerative or heterotopic changes on their latest radiograph. In contrast, more favourable outcomes were detected in patients with successful radial head reconstruction after Mason type III fractures. Conclusion. Using a standardized protocol, sufficient elbow stability and good outcomes can be achieved in most TTIs. Although some bias in treatment allocation, with more severe injuries assigned to RHA, cannot be completely omitted, treatment of radial head fractures may have an independent effect on outcome, as patients subjected to RHA showed significantly inferior results compared to those subjected to reconstruction, in terms of elbow function, incidence of arthrosis, and postoperative complications. As RHA showed no apparent advantage in Mason type III injuries between the two treatment groups, we recommend reconstruction, providing stable fixation can be achieved. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1620–1628


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 1 | Pages 56 - 64
1 Jan 2021
Podmore B Hutchings A Skinner JA MacGregor AJ van der Meulen J

Aims. Access to joint replacement is being restricted for patients with comorbidities in a number of high-income countries. However, there is little evidence on the impact of comorbidities on outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of hip and knee arthroplasty in patients with and without comorbidities. Methods. In total, 312,079 hip arthroplasty and 328,753 knee arthroplasty patients were included. A total of 11 common comorbidities were identified in administrative hospital records. Safety risks were measured by assessing length of hospital stay (LOS) and 30-day emergency readmissions and mortality. Effectiveness outcomes were changes in Oxford Hip or Knee Scores (OHS/OKS) (scale from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)) and in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) (scale from 0 (death) to 1 (full health)) from immediately before, to six months after, surgery. Regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted mean differences (LOS, change in OHS/OKS/EQ-5D) and risk differences (readmissions and mortality). Results. Patients with comorbidities had a longer LOS and higher readmission and mortality rates than patients without. In hip arthroplasty patients with heart disease, for example, LOS was 1.20 days (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.25) longer and readmission rate was 1.52% (95% CI 1.34% to 1.71%) and mortality 0.19% (95% CI 0.15% to 0.23%) higher. Similar patterns were observed for knee arthroplasty patients. Patients without comorbidities reported large improvements in function (mean improvement OHS 21.3 (SD 9.91) and OKS 15.9 (SD 10.0)). Patients with comorbidities reported only slightly smaller improvements. In patients with heart disease, mean improvement in OHS was 0.39 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.51) and in OKS 0.56 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.67) less than in patients without comorbidities. There were no significant differences in EQ-5D improvement. Conclusion. Comorbidities were associated with small increases in adverse safety risks but they have little impact on pain or function in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. These results do not support restricting access to hip and knee arthroplasty for patients with common comorbidities. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):56–64


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 7 | Pages 941 - 949
1 Jul 2020
Price AJ Kang S Cook JA Dakin H Blom A Arden N Fitzpatrick R Beard DJ

Aims. To calculate how the likelihood of obtaining measurable benefit from hip or knee arthroplasty varies with preoperative patient-reported scores. Methods. Existing UK data from 222,933 knee and 209,760 hip arthroplasty patients were used to model an individual’s probability of gaining meaningful improvement after surgery based on their preoperative Oxford Knee or Hip Score (OKS/OHS). A clinically meaningful improvement after arthroplasty was defined as ≥ 8 point improvement in OHS, and ≥ 7 in OKS. Results. The upper preoperative score threshold, above which patients are unlikely to achieve any meaningful improvement from surgery, is 41 for knees and 40 for hips. At lower scores, the probability of improvement increased towards a maximum of 88% (knee) and 95% for (hips). Conclusion. By our definition of meaningful improvement, patients with preoperative scores above 41 (OKS) and 40 (OHS) should not be routinely referred to secondary care for possible arthroplasty. Using lower thresholds would incrementally increase the probability of meaningful benefit for those referred but will exclude some patients with potential to benefit. The findings are useful to support the complex shared decision-making process in primary care for referral to secondary care; and in secondary care for experienced clinicians counselling patients considering knee or hip arthroplasty, but should not be used in isolation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7):941–949


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 3 | Pages 500 - 506
1 Mar 2021
Leonard HJ Ohly NE

Aims. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical, radiological, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the first 100 consecutive patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) via a direct superior approach (DSA) with a matched group of patients undergoing THA by the same surgeon, using a posterolateral approach (PLA). Methods. This was a retrospective single surgeon study comparing the first 100 consecutive DSA THA patients with a matched group of patients using a standard PLA. Case notes were examined for patient demographics, length of hospital stay, operating time, intra- and postoperative complications, pain score, satisfaction score, and Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Leg length discrepancy and component positioning were measured from postoperative plain radiographs. Results. The DSA patients had a shorter length of hospital stay (mean 2.09 days (SD 1.20) DSA vs 2.74 days (SD 1.17) PLA; p < 0.001) and shorter time to discharge from the inpatient physiotherapy teams (mean 1.44 days (SD 1.17) DSA vs 1.93 days (SD 0.96) PLA; p < 0.001). There were no differences in operating time (p = 0.505), pain levels up to postoperative day 1 (p = 0.106 to p =0.242), OHS (p = 0.594 to p = 0.815), satisfaction levels (p = 0.066 to p = 0.299), stem alignment (p = 0.240), acetabular component inclination (p < 0.001) and anteversion (p < 0.001), or leg length discrepancy (p = 0.134). Conclusion. While the DSA appears safe and was not associated with a significant difference in PROMs, radiological findings, or intraoperative or postoperative complications, a randomized controlled trial with functional outcomes in the postoperative phase is needed to evaluate this surgical approach formally. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):500–506


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 4 | Pages 788 - 794
1 Apr 2021
Spierenburg G Lancaster ST van der Heijden L Mastboom MJL Gelderblom H Pratap S van de Sande MAJ Gibbons CLMH

Aims. Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) is one of the most common soft-tissue tumours of the foot and ankle and can behave in a locally aggressive manner. Tumour control can be difficult, despite the various methods of treatment available. Since treatment guidelines are lacking, the aim of this study was to review the multidisciplinary management by presenting the largest series of TGCT of the foot and ankle to date from two specialized sarcoma centres. Methods. The Oxford Tumour Registry and the Leiden University Medical Centre Sarcoma Registry were retrospectively reviewed for patients with histologically proven foot and ankle TGCT diagnosed between January 2002 and August 2019. Results. A total of 84 patients were included. There were 39 men and 45 women with a mean age at primary treatment of 38.3 years (9 to 72). The median follow-up was 46.5 months (interquartile range (IQR) 21.3 to 82.3). Localized-type TGCT (n = 15) predominantly affected forefoot, whereas diffuse-type TGCT (Dt-TGCT) (n = 9) tended to panarticular involvement. TGCT was not included in the radiological differential diagnosis in 20% (n = 15/75). Most patients had open rather than arthroscopic surgery (76 vs 17). The highest recurrence rates were seen with Dt-TGCT (61%; n = 23/38), panarticular involvement (83%; n = 5/8), and after arthroscopy (47%; n = 8/17). Three (4%) fusions were carried out for osteochondral destruction by Dt-TGCT. There were 14 (16%) patients with Dt-TGCT who underwent systemic treatment, mostly in refractory cases (79%; n = 11). TGCT initially decreased or stabilized in 12 patients (86%), but progressed in five (36%) during follow-up; all five underwent subsequent surgery. Side effects were reported in 12 patients (86%). Conclusion. We recommend open surgical excision as the primary treatment for TGCT of the foot and ankle, particularly in patients with Dt-TGCT with extra-articular involvement. Severe osteochondral destruction may justify salvage procedures, although these are not often undertaken. Systemic treatment is indicated for unresectable or refractory cases. However, side effects are commonly experienced, and relapses may occur once treatment has ceased. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):788–794


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1491 - 1496
1 Nov 2020
Buddhdev PK Vanhegan IS Khan T Hashemi-Nejad A

Aims. Despite advances in the treatment of paediatric hip disease, adolescent and young adult patients can develop early onset end-stage osteoarthritis. The aims of this study were to address the indications and medium-term outcomes for total hip arthroplasty (THA) with ceramic bearings for teenage patients. Methods. Surgery was performed by a single surgeon working in the paediatric orthopaedic unit of a tertiary referral hospital. Databases were interrogated from 2003 to 2017 for all teenage patients undergoing THA with a minimum 2.3 year follow-up. Data capture included patient demographics, the underlying hip pathology, number of previous surgeries, and THA prostheses used. Institutional ethical approval was granted to contact patients for prospective clinical outcomes and obtain up-to-date radiographs. In total, 60 primary hips were implanted in 51 patients (35 female, 16 male) with nine bilateral cases. The mean age was 16.7 years (12 to 19) and mean follow-up was 9.3 years (2.3 to 16.8). Results. The most common indication for teenage hip arthroplasty was avascular necrosis secondary to slipped upper femoral epiphysis (31%; n = 16). Overall, 64% of patients (n = 33) had undergone multiple previous operations. The survival at follow-up was 97%; two patients required revision for aseptic loosening (one femoral stem, one acetabular component). Both patients had fused hips noted at the time of arthroplasty. A further two patients had radiolucent lines but were asymptomatic. At latest follow-up the mean Oxford Hip Score was 44 (31 to 48) and a Visual Analogue Scale measurement of 1.5, indicating satisfactory function. Conclusion. Operating on this cohort can be complicated by multiple previous surgeries and distorted anatomy, which in some cases require custom-made prostheses. We have demonstrated a good outcome with low revision rate in this complex group of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1491–1496








The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 7 | Pages 950 - 958
1 Jul 2020
Dakin H Eibich P Beard D Gray A Price A

Aims. To assess how the cost-effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) varies with age, sex, and preoperative Oxford Hip or Knee Score (OHS/OKS); and to identify the patient groups for whom THA/TKA is cost-effective. Methods. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model from a United Kingdom NHS perspective, informed by published analyses of patient-level data. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of THA and TKA in adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis compared with having no arthroplasty surgery during the ten-year time horizon. Results. THA and TKA cost < £7,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained at all preoperative scores below the absolute referral thresholds calculated previously (40 for OHS and 41 for OKS). Furthermore, THA cost < £20,000/QALY for patients with OHS of ≤ 45, while TKA was cost-effective for patients with OKS of ≤ 43, since the small improvements in quality of life outweighed the cost of surgery and any subsequent revisions. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated that there is little uncertainty around the conclusions. Conclusion. If society is willing to pay £20,000 per QALY gained, THA and TKA are cost-effective for nearly all patients who currently undergo surgery, including all patients at and above our calculated absolute referral thresholds. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7):950–958


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 5 | Pages 305 - 313
3 May 2021
Razii N Clutton JM Kakar R Morgan-Jones R

Aims. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Two-stage revision has traditionally been considered the gold standard of treatment for established infection, but increasing evidence is emerging in support of one-stage exchange for selected patients. The objective of this study was to determine the outcomes of single-stage revision TKA for PJI, with mid-term follow-up. Methods. A total of 84 patients, with a mean age of 68 years (36 to 92), underwent single-stage revision TKA for confirmed PJI at a single institution between 2006 and 2016. In all, 37 patients (44%) were treated for an infected primary TKA, while the majority presented with infected revisions: 31 had undergone one previous revision (36.9%) and 16 had multiple prior revisions (19.1%). Contraindications to single-stage exchange included systemic sepsis, extensive bone or soft-tissue loss, extensor mechanism failure, or if primary wound closure was unlikely to be achievable. Patients were not excluded for culture-negative PJI or the presence of a sinus. Results. Overall, 76 patients (90.5%) were infection-free at a mean follow-up of seven years, with eight reinfections (9.5%). Culture-negative PJI was not associated with a higher reinfection rate (p = 0.343). However, there was a significantly higher rate of recurrence in patients with polymicrobial infections (p = 0.003). The mean Oxford Knee Score (OKS) improved from 18.7 (SD 8.7) preoperatively to 33.8 (SD 9.7) at six months postoperatively (p < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier implant survival rate for all causes of reoperation, including reinfection and aseptic failure, was 95.2% at one year (95% confidence interval (CI) 87.7 to 98.2), 83.5% at five years (95% CI 73.2 to 90.3), and 78.9% at 12 years (95% CI 66.8 to 87.2). Conclusion. One-stage exchange, using a strict debridement protocol and multidisciplinary input, is an effective treatment option for the infected TKA. This is the largest single-surgeon series of consecutive cases reported to date, with broad inclusion criteria. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):305–313


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 1, Issue 8 | Pages 465 - 473
1 Aug 2020
Aspinall SK Wheeler PC Godsiff SP Hignett SM Fong DTP

Aims. This study aims to evaluate a new home medical stretching device called the Self Treatment Assisted Knee (STAK) tool to treat knee arthrofibrosis. Methods. 35 patients post-major knee surgery with arthrofibrosis and mean range of movement (ROM) of 68° were recruited. Both the STAK intervention and control group received standard physiotherapy for eight weeks, with the intervention group additionally using the STAK at home. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) were collected at all timepoints. An acceptability and home exercise questionnaire capturing adherence was recorded after each of the interventions. Results. Compared to the control group, the STAK intervention group made significant gains in mean ROM (30° versus 8°, p < 0.0005), WOMAC (19 points versus 3, p < 0.0005), and OKS (8 points versus 3, p < 0.0005). The improvements in the STAK group were maintained at long-term follow-up. No patients suffered any complications relating to the STAK, and 96% of patients found the STAK tool ‘perfectly acceptable’. Conclusion. The STAK tool is effective in increasing ROM and reducing pain and stiffness. Patients find it acceptable and adherence to treatment was high. This study indicates that the STAK tool would be of benefit in clinical practice and may offer a new, cost-effective treatment for arthrofibrosis. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:465–473