Femoroacetabular Junction Impingement (FAI) describes abnormalities
in the shape of the femoral head–neck junction, or abnormalities
in the orientation of the acetabulum. In the short term, FAI can
give rise to pain and disability, and in the long-term it significantly increases
the risk of developing osteoarthritis. The Femoroacetabular Impingement
Trial (FAIT) aims to determine whether operative or non-operative
intervention is more effective at improving symptoms and preventing
the development and progression of osteoarthritis. FAIT is a multicentre superiority parallel two-arm randomised
controlled trial comparing physiotherapy and activity modification
with arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of symptomatic FAI.
Patients aged 18 to 60 with clinical and radiological evidence of
FAI are eligible. Principal exclusion criteria include previous
surgery to the index hip, established osteoarthritis (Kellgren–Lawrence
≥ 2), hip dysplasia (centre-edge angle <
20°), and completion
of a physiotherapy programme targeting FAI within the previous 12
months. Recruitment will take place over 24 months and 120 patients
will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio and followed up for three years.
The two primary outcome measures are change in hip outcome score
eight months post-randomisation (approximately six-months post-intervention
initiation) and change in radiographic minimum joint space width
38 months post-randomisation. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01893034. Cite this article: Aims
Methods
We compared thromboembolic events, major haemorrhage
and death after total hip replacement in patients receiving either
aspirin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). We analysed data from
the National Joint Registry for England and Wales linked to an administrative
database of hospital admissions in the English National Health Service.
A total of 108 584 patients operated on between April 2003 and September 2008
were included and followed up for 90 days. Multivariable risk modelling
and propensity score matching were used to estimate odds ratios
(OR) adjusted for baseline risk factors. An OR <
1 indicates
that rates are lower with LMWH than with aspirin. In all, 21.1%
of patients were prescribed aspirin and 78.9% LMWH. Without adjustment, we
found no statistically significant differences. The rate of pulmonary
embolism was 0.68% in both groups and 90-day mortality was 0.65%
with aspirin and 0.61% with LMWH (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11).
With risk adjustment, the difference in mortality increased (OR
0.84; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01). With propensity score matching the mortality difference
increased even further to 0.65% with aspirin and 0.51% with LMWH
(OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.98). These results should be considered
when the conflicting recommendations of existing guidelines for
thromboprophylaxis after hip replacement are being addressed.
This was a safety study where the hypothesis was that the newer-design CPCS femoral stem would demonstrate similar early clinical results and micromovement to the well-established Exeter stem. Both are collarless, tapered, polished cemented stems, the only difference being a slight lateral to medial taper with the CPCS stem. A total of 34 patients were enrolled in a single-blinded randomised controlled trial in which 17 patients received a dedicated radiostereometric CPCS stem and 17 a radiostereometric Exeter stem. No difference was found in any of the outcome measures pre-operatively or post-operatively between groups. At two years, the mean subsidence for the CPCS stem was nearly half that seen for the Exeter stem (0.77 mm (−0.943 to 1.77) and 1.25 mm (0.719 to 1.625), respectively; p = 0.032). In contrast, the mean internal rotation of the CPCS stem was approximately twice that of the Exeter (1.61° (−1.07° to 4.33°) and 0.59° (0.97° to 1.64°), respectively; p = 0.048). Other migration patterns were not significantly different between the stems. The subtle differences in designs may explain the different patterns of migration. Comparable migration with the Exeter stem suggests that the CPCS design will perform well in the long term.
The August 2014 Knee Roundup360 looks at: re-admission following total knee replacement; out with the old and in with the new? computer navigation revisited; approach less important in knee replacement; is obesity driving a rise in knee replacements?; knee replacement isn’t cheap in the obese; cruciate substitution doesn’t increase knee flexion; and sonication useful diagnostic aid in two-stage revision.
The August 2014 Wrist &
Hand Roundup360 looks at: Trapeziectomy superior to arthrodesis;
Most patients with a nightstick fracture of the
ulna are treated conservatively. Various techniques of immobilisation or
early mobilisation have been studied. We performed a systematic
review of all published randomised controlled trials and observational
studies that have assessed the outcome of these fractures following
above- or below-elbow immobilisation, bracing and early mobilisation.
We searched multiple electronic databases, related bibliographies and
other studies. We included 27 studies comprising 1629 fractures
in the final analysis. The data relating to the time to radiological
union and the rates of delayed union and nonunion could be pooled
and analysed statistically. We found that early mobilisation produced the shortest radiological
time to union (mean 8.0 weeks) and the lowest mean rate of nonunion
(0.6%). Fractures treated with above- or below-elbow immobilisation
and braces had longer mean radiological times to union (9.2 weeks,
9.2 weeks and 8.7 weeks, respectively) and higher mean rates of
nonunion (3.8%, 2.1% and 0.8%, respectively). There was no statistically
significant difference in the rate of non- or delayed union between
those treated by early mobilisation and the three forms of immobilisation
(p = 0.142 to p = 1.000, respectively). All the studies had significant
biases, but until a robust randomised controlled trial is undertaken
the best advice for the treatment of undisplaced or partially displaced
nightstick fractures appears to be early mobilisation, with a removable
forearm support for comfort as required. Cite this article:
The June 2014 Knee Roundup360 looks at: acute repair preferable in hamstring ruptures; osteoarthritis a given in ACL injury, even with reconstruction?; chicken and egg: patellofemoral dysfunction and hip weakness; meniscal root tears as bad as we thought; outcomes in the meniscus; topical NSAIDs have a measurable effect on synovitis; nailing for tibial peri-prosthetic fracture.
Using meta-analysis we compared the survival and clinical outcomes of cemented and uncemented techniques in primary total knee replacement. We reviewed randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing cemented and uncemented fixation. Our primary outcome was survival of the implant free of aseptic loosening. Our secondary outcome was joint function as measured by the Knee Society score. We identified 15 studies that met our final eligibility criteria. The combined odds ratio for failure of the implant due to aseptic loosening for the uncemented group was 4.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7 to 6.5) (p <
0.0001). Subgroup analysis of data only from randomised controlled trials showed no differences between the groups for odds of aseptic loosening (odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 0.55 to 6.40, p = 0.314). The weighted mean difference for the Knee Society score was 0.005 (95% CI −0.26 to 0.26) (p = 0.972). There was improved survival of the cemented compared to uncemented implants, with no statistically significant difference in the mean Knee Society score between groups for all pooled data.
The April 2014 Wrist &
Hand Roundup360 looks at: diagnosis of compressive neuropathy; relevant reviews; the biomechanics of dorsal PIP fracture dislocation; the more strands the better; and state of mind the best predictor of outcome.
The incidence of anterior knee pain following
total knee replacement (TKR) is reported to be as high as 49%. The source
of the pain is poorly understood but the soft tissues around the
patella have been implicated. In theory circumferential electrocautery denervates the patella
thereby reducing efferent pain signals. However, there is mixed
evidence that this practice translates into improved outcomes. We aimed to investigate the clinical effect of intra-operative
circumpatellar electrocautery in patients undergoing TKR using the
LCS mobile bearing or Kinemax fixed bearing TKR. A total of 200
patients were randomised to receive either circumpatellar electrocautery
(diathermy) or not (control). Patients were assessed by visual analogue
scale (VAS) for anterior knee pain and Oxford knee score (OKS) pre-operatively
and three months, six months and one year post-operatively. Patients
and assessors were blinded. There were 91 patients in the diathermy group and 94 in the control.
The mean VAS improvement at one year was 3.9 in both groups (control;
-10 to 6, diathermy; We found no relevant effect of patellar electrocautery on either
VAS anterior knee pain or OKS for patients undergoing LCS and Kinemax
TKR.
The first Cochrane Corner of 2014 reports on a bumper number of new and updated reviews from the Cochrane Collaboration. Since November the Cochrane collaboration have turned their beady eye to scrutinise several topical (and sometimes controversial) orthopaedic issues such as pin site care, the use of Continuous Passive Motion (CPM) in the rehabilitation of total knee replacement (TKR) and the efficacy of nerve blocks.
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.
Substantial healthcare resources have been devoted
to computer navigation and patient-specific instrumentation systems
that improve the reproducibility with which neutral mechanical alignment
can be achieved following total knee replacement (TKR). This choice of
alignment is based on the long-held tenet that the alignment of
the limb post-operatively should be within 3° of a neutral mechanical
axis. Several recent studies have demonstrated no significant difference
in survivorship when comparing well aligned Review of the literature suggests that a neutral mechanical axis
remains the optimal guide to alignment. Cite this article:
This protocol describes a pragmatic multicentre
randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the clinical and cost
effectiveness of arthroscopic and open surgery in the management
of rotator cuff tears. This trial began in 2007 and was modified
in 2010, with the removal of a non-operative arm due to high rates
of early crossover to surgery. Cite this article:
Our aim in this pilot study was to evaluate the fixation of, the bone remodelling around, and the clinical outcome after surgery of a new, uncemented, fully hydroxyapatite-coated, collared and tapered femoral component, designed specifically for elderly patients with a fracture of the femoral neck. We enrolled 50 patients, of at least 70 years of age, with an acute displaced fracture of the femoral neck in this prospective single-series study. They received a total hip replacement using the new component and were followed up regularly for two years. Fixation was evaluated by radiostereometric analysis and bone remodelling by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Hip function and the health-related quality of life were assessed using the Harris hip score and the EuroQol-5D. Up to six weeks post-operatively there was a mean subsidence of 0.2 mm (−2.1 to +0.5) and a retroversion of a mean of 1.2° (−8.2° to +1.5°). No component migrated after three months. The patients had a continuous loss of peri-prosthetic bone which amounted to a mean of 16% (−49% to +10%) at two years. The mean Harris hip score was 82 (51 to 100) after two years. The two-year results from this pilot study indicate that this new, uncemented femoral component can be used for elderly patients with osteoporotic fractures of the femoral neck.
The December 2013 Trauma Roundup360 looks at: Re-operation for intertrochanteric hip fractures; Are twin incisions better than one round the acetabulum?; Salvage osteotomy for calcaneal fractures; Posterior dislocation; Should MRSA be covered in open fractures?; Characterising the saline load test; Has it healed: hip fractures under the spotlight; and stem cells present in atrophic non-union.
The February 2014 Knee Roundup360 looks at: whether sham surgery is as good as arthroscopic meniscectomy; distraction in knee osteoarthritis; whether trans-tibial tunnel placement increases the risk of graft failure in ACL surgery; whether joint replacements prevent cardiac events; the size of the pulmonary embolism problem; tranexamic acid and knee replacement haemostasis; matching the demand for knee replacement and follow-up; predicting the length of stay after knee replacement; and popliteal artery injury in TKR.