Aims

The aim of this study was to examine the results of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) undertaken for stiffness in the absence of sepsis or loosening.

Aims

To examine the rates of hamstring graft salvage with arthroscopic debridement of infected anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction as reported in the literature and discuss functional outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) for post-operative stiffness with a matched cohort of TKA patients who did not requre MUA.

In total 72 patients (mean age 59.8 years, 42 to 83) who underwent MUA following TKA were identified from our prospective database and compared with a matched cohort of patients who had undergone TKA without subsequent MUA. Patients were evaluated for range of movement (ROM) and clinical outcome scores (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, Short-Form Health Survey, and Knee Society Clinical Rating System) at a mean follow-up of 36.4 months (12 to 120). MUA took place at a mean of nine weeks (5 to 18) after TKA. In patients who required MUA, mean flexion deformity improved from 10° (0° to 25°) to 4.4° (0° to 15°) (p < 0.001), and mean range of flexion improved from 79.8° (65° to 95°) to 116° (80° to 130°) (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in ROM or functional outcome scores at three months, one year, or two years between those who required MUA and those who did not. There were no complications associated with manipulation.

At most recent follow-up, patients requiring MUA achieved equivalent ROM and clinical outcome scores when compared with a matched control group. While other studies have focused on ROM after manipulation, the current study adds to current literature by supplementing this with functional outcome scores.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1640–4.

The October 2015 Research Roundup360 looks at: Wasted implants; Biofilms revisited; Peri-operative anticoagulation not required in atrial fibrillation; Determinants in outcome following orthopaedic surgery; Patient ‘activation’ and outcomes; Neuroplasticity and nerve repair; KOOS Score in predicting injury?

There is a large amount of evidence available about the relative merits of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty (UKA and TKA). Based on the same evidence, different people draw different conclusions and as a result, there is great variability in the usage of UKA.

The revision rate of UKA is much higher than TKA and so some surgeons conclude that UKA should not be performed. Other surgeons believe that the main reason for the high revision rate is that UKA is easy to revise and, therefore, the threshold for revision is low. They also believe that UKA has many advantages over TKA such as a faster recovery, lower morbidity and mortality and better function. They therefore conclude that UKA should be undertaken whenever appropriate.

The solution to this argument is to minimise the revision rate of UKA, thereby addressing the main disadvantage of UKA. The evidence suggests that this will be achieved if surgeons use UKA for at least 20% of their knee arthroplasties and use implants that are appropriate for these broad indications.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):3–8.

This study reports on the first 150 consecutive Oxford cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA) performed in an independent centre (126 patients). All eligible patients had functional scores (Oxford knee score and high activity arthroplasty score) recorded pre-operatively and at two- and five-years of follow-up. Fluoroscopically aligned radiographs were taken at five years and analysed for any evidence of radiolucent lines (RLLs), subsidence or loosening. The mean age of the cohort was 63.6 years (39 to 86) with 81 (53.1%) males. Excellent functional scores were maintained at five years and there were no progressive RLLs demonstrated on radiographs. Two patients underwent revision to a total knee arthroplasty giving a revision rate of 0.23/100 (95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.84) component years with overall component survivorship of 98.7% at five years. There were a further four patients who underwent further surgery on the same knee, two underwent bearing exchanges for dislocation and two underwent lateral UKAs for disease progression. This was a marked improvement from other UKAs reported in New Zealand Joint Registry data and supports the designing centre’s early results.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1358–63.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of various non-operative modalities of treatment (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS); neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES); insoles and bracing) on the pain of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

We conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify the therapeutic options which are commonly adopted for the management of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

The outcome measurement tools used in the different studies were the visual analogue scale and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index pain index: all pain scores were converted to a 100-point scale.

A total of 30 studies met our inclusion criteria: 13 on insoles, seven on TENS, six on NMES, and four on bracing. The standardised mean difference (SMD) in pain after treatment with TENS was 1.796, which represented a significant reduction in pain. The significant overall effect estimate for NMES on pain was similar to that of TENS, with a SMD of 1.924. The overall effect estimate of insoles on pain was a SMD of 0.992. The overall effect of bracing showed a significant reduction in pain of 1.34.

Overall, all four non-operative modalities of treatment were found to have a significant effect on the reduction of pain in OA of the knee.

This study shows that non-operative physical modalities of treatment are of benefit when treating OA of the knee. However, much of the literature reviewed evaluates studies with follow-up of less than six months: future work should aim to evaluate patients with longer follow-up.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):89–94.

The aims of this study were to report functional outcomes of salvage procedures for patients with cerebral palsy (CP) who have chronic dislocation of the hip using validated scoring systems, and to compare the results of three surgical techniques.

We reviewed 37 patients retrospectively. The mean age at the time of surgery was 12.2 years (8 to 22) and the mean follow-up was 56 months (24 to 114). Patients were divided into three groups: 14 who underwent proximal femoral resection arthroplasty (PFRA group 1), ten who underwent subtrochanteric valgus osteotomy (SVO group 2), and 13 who underwent subtrochanteric valgus osteotomy with resection of the femoral head (SVO with FHR group 3). All patients were evaluated using the Caregiver Priorities and Child Health Index of Life with Disabilities (CPCHILD) and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL).

Significant improvements occurred in most CPCHILD and PedsQL subsection scores following surgery in all patients, without significant differences between the groups. There were 12 post-operative complications. Less severe complications were seen in group 1 than in groups 2 and 3.

Salvage surgery appears to provide pain relief in patients with CP who have painful chronic dislocation of the hip. The three salvage procedures produced similar results, however, we recommend the use of PFRA as the complications are less severe.

Take home message: Salvage surgery can be of benefit to patients with CP with chronic painful hip dislocation, but should be limited to selected patients considering complications.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:137–43.

The December 2015 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: The midfoot fusion bolt: has it had its day?; Ankle arthroplasty: only for the old?; A return to the Keller’s osteotomy for diabetic feet?; Joint sparing surgery for ankle arthritis in the context of deformity?; Beware the subtalar fusion in the ankle arthrodesis patient?; Nonunion in the foot and ankle a predictive score; Cast versus early weight bearing following Achilles tendon repair; Should we plate Lisfranc injuries?

The December 2015 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup360 looks at:

The December 2015 Wrist & Hand Roundup360 looks at: Fuse or replace? The index PIPJ; A solution for the unstable DRUJ at last; Anatomical reconstruction in place of arthroplasty?; The Welsh ‘fight bite’; Does surgeon empathy improve results?; Regional or local for wrist analgesia; The evidence for wrist arthroplasty; FPL rupture a hidden problem?; Deciding on surgery in the distal radius; Composing that paper in hand surgery

We compared the ceiling effects of two patient-rating scores, the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), and a physician-rating score, the Modified Mayo Wrist Score (MMWS) in assessing the outcome of surgical treatment of an unstable distal radial fracture. A total of 77 women with a mean age of 64.2 years (50 to 88) who underwent fixation using a volar locking plate for an unstable distal radial fracture between 2011 and 2013 were enrolled in this study. All completed the DASH and PRWE questionnaires one year post-operatively and were assessed using the MMWS by the senior author. The ceiling effects in the outcome data assessed for each score were estimated.

The data assessed with both patient-rating scores, the DASH and PRWE, showed substantial ceiling effects, whereas the data assessed with MMWS showed no ceiling effect.

Researchers should be aware of a possible ceiling effect in the assessment of the outcome of the surgical treatment of distal radial fractures using patient-rating scores. It could also increase the likelihood of a type II error.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1651–6.

The December 2015 Knee Roundup360 looks at: Albumin and complications in knee arthroplasty; Tantalum: a knee fixation for all seasons?; Dynamic knee alignment; Tibial component design in UKA; Managing the tidal wave of revision knee arthroplasty; Scoring pain in TKR; Does anyone have a ‘normal’ tibial slope?; XLPE in TKR? A five-year clinical study; Spacers and infected revision arthroplasties; Dialysis and arthroplasty

Objectives

We performed a systematic review of the literature to determine the safety and efficacy of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) compared with bone graft when used specifically for revision spinal fusion surgery secondary to pseudarthrosis.

Failed internal fixation of a fracture of the proximal humerus produces many challenges with limited surgical options. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes after the use of a reverse shoulder arthroplasty under these circumstances. Between 2007 and 2012, 19 patients (15 women and four men, mean age 66 years; 52 to 82) with failed internal fixation after a proximal humeral fracture, underwent implant removal and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The mean follow-up was 36 months (25 to 60). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Score improved from 27.8 to 50.1 (p = 0.019). The mean Simple Shoulder Test score improved from 0.7 to 3.2 (p = 0.020), and the mean visual analogue scale for pain improved from 6.8 to 4.3 (p = 0.012). Mean forward flexion improved from 58.7° to 101.1° (p < 0.001), mean abduction from 58.7° to 89.1° (p = 0.012), mean external rotation from 10.7° to 23.1° (p = 0.043) and mean internal rotation from buttocks to L4 (p = 0.034). A major complication was recorded in five patients (26%) (one intra-operative fracture, loosening of the humeral component in two and two peri-prosthetic fractures). A total of 15 patients (79%) rated their outcome as excellent or good, one (5%) as satisfactory, and three (16%) as unsatisfactory.

An improvement in outcomes and pain can be expected when performing a RSA as a salvage procedure after failed internal fixation of a fracture of the proximal humerus. Patients should be cautioned about the possibility for major complications following this technically demanding procedure.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:967–72.