Total knee replacement (TKR) is an effective method of treating end-stage arthritis of the knee. It is not, however, a procedure without risk due to a number of factors, one of which is diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this study was to estimate the general prevalence of diabetes in patients about to undergo primary TKR and to determine whether diabetes mellitus adversely affects the outcome. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. The Odds Ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were used to represent the estimate of risk of a specific outcome. Our results showed the prevalence of diabetes mellitus among patients undergoing TKR was 12.2%. Patients with diabetes mellitus had an increased risk of deep infection (OR = 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.38 to 1.88), deep vein thrombosis (in Asia, OR = 2.57, 95% CI, 1.58 to 4.20), periprosthetic fracture (OR = 1.89, 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.45), aseptic loosening (OR = 9.36, 95% CI, 4.63 to 18.90), and a poorer Knee Society function subscore (MD = -5.86, 95% CI, -10.27 to -1.46). Surgeons should advise patients specifically about these increased risks when obtaining informed consent and be meticulous about their peri-operative care.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1637–43.

While the Cochrane Collaboration have been busy over the last four months, only a handful of their published reviews have been of any relevance to orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Those that are provide the reader with an overview of work on imaging modalities, antibiotic therapy, changes to the surgical site dressing and practices surrounding post-operative wound management, including post-op bathing and negative pressure wound therapy for use in the treatment of diabetic foot wounds.

This study evaluated whether obese patients who lost weight before their total joint replacement and kept it off post-operatively were at lower risk of surgical site infection (SSI) and re-admission compared with those who remained the same weight.

We reviewed 444 patients who underwent a total hip replacement and 937 with a total knee replacement who lost weight pre-operatively and sustained their weight loss after surgery. After adjustments, patients who lost weight before a total hip replacement and kept it off post-operatively had a 3.77 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59 to 8.95) greater likelihood of deep SSIs and those who lost weight before a total knee replacement had a 1.63 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.28) greater likelihood of re-admission compared with the reference group.

These findings raise questions about the safety of weight management before total replacement of the hip and knee joints.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:629–35.

We have analysed the management and clinical outcome of a series of consecutive patients who had a total hip replacement and developed post-operative surgical site infection (SSI) with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The incidence of this infection was 1% over a period of five years. We studied SSI in 15 patients (16 infections) with a mean age of 72.7 years (53 to 81). In all, 12 of the infections occurred early and half of the infections involved the prosthesis, resulting in an increase of 11-fold in the cumulative hospital stay.

Methicillin-resistant Staph. aureus was successfully eradicated in all the patients after a mean follow-up of 53.6 months (25 to 88). Superficial incisional infections resolved after antibiotic therapy alone while deep infections required multiple operative debridements. Attempted retention of the implant in early organ space infections was successful in only one of five patients. Only three patients with implant-level infections obtained a pain-free, functional prosthesis while a further three required excision arthroplasty. We have formulated a protocol of treatment which may serve as a guide in the management of these infections.

We evaluated the cost and consequences of proximal femoral fractures requiring further surgery because of complications. The data were collected prospectively in a standard manner from all patients with a proximal femoral fracture presenting to the trauma unit at the John Radcliffe Hospital over a five-year period. The total cost of treatment for each patient was calculated by separating it into its various components. The risk factors for the complications that arose, the location of their discharge and the mortality rates for these patients were compared to those of a matched control group. There were 2360 proximal femoral fractures in 2257 patients, of which 144 (6.1%) required further surgery. The mean cost of treatment in patients with complications was £18 709 (£2606.30 to £60.827.10), compared with £8610 (£918.54 to £45 601.30) for uncomplicated cases (p < 0.01), with a mean length of stay of 62.8 (44.5 to 79.3) and 32.7 (23.8 to 35.0) days, respectively. The probability of mortality after one month in these cases was significantly higher than in the control group, with a mean survival of 209 days, compared with 496 days for the controls. Patients with complications were statistically less likely to return to their own home (p < 0.01).

Greater awareness and understanding are required to minimise the complications of proximal femoral fractures and consequently their cost.

Prospective data on hip fracture from 3686 patients at a United Kingdom teaching hospital were analysed to investigate the risk factors, financial costs and outcomes associated with deep or superficial wound infections after hip fracture surgery.

In 1.2% (41) of patients a deep wound infection developed, and 1.1% (39) had a superficial wound infection. A total of 57 of 80 infections (71.3%) were due to Staphylococcus aureus and 39 (48.8%) were due to MRSA.

No statistically significant pre-operative risk factors were detected. Length of stay, cost of treatment and pre-discharge mortality all significantly increased with deep wound infection. The one-year mortality was 30%, and this increased to 50% in those who developed an infection (p < 0.001). A deep infection resulted in doubled operative costs, tripled investigation costs and quadrupled ward costs.

MRSA infection increased costs, length of stay, and pre-discharge mortality compared with non-MRSA infection.