Intra-operative, peri-articular injection of local anaesthesia is an increasingly popular way of controlling pain following total knee replacement. At the same time, the problems associated with allogenic blood transfusion have led to interest in alternative methods for managing blood loss after total knee replacement, including the use of auto-transfusion of fluid from the patient’s surgical drain. It is safe to combine peri-articular infiltration with auto-transfusion from the drain. We performed a randomised clinical trial to compare the concentration of local anaesthetic in the blood and in the fluid collected in the knee drain in patients having either a peri-articular injection or a femoral nerve block. Clinically relevant concentrations of local anaesthetic were found in the fluid from the drains of patients having peri-articular injections (4.92 μg/ml (sd 3.151)). However, none of the patients having femoral nerve blockade had detectable levels. None of the patients in either group had clinically relevant concentrations of local anaesthetic in their blood after re-transfusion.

The evidence from this study suggests that it is safe to use peri-articular injection in combination with auto-transfusion of blood from peri-articular drains during knee replacement surgery.

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. The National Hip Fracture Audit currently provides a framework for service evaluation. This evaluation is based upon the assessment of process rather than assessment of patient-centred outcome and therefore it fails to provide meaningful data regarding the clinical effectiveness of treatments. This study aims to capture data from the cohort of patients who present with a fracture of the proximal femur at a single United Kingdom Major Trauma Centre. Patient-centred outcomes will be recorded and provide a baseline cohort within which to test the clinical effectiveness of experimental interventions.

The ideal form of fixation for displaced, extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia remains controversial. In the UK, open reduction and internal fixation with locking-plates and intramedullary nailing are the two most common forms of treatment. Both techniques provide reliable fixation but both are associated with specific complications. There is little information regarding the functional recovery following either procedure.

We performed a randomised pilot trial to determine the functional outcome of 24 adult patients treated with either a locking-plate (n = 12) or an intramedullary nailing (n = 12). At six months, there was an adjusted difference of 13 points in the Disability Rating Index in favour of the intramedullary nail. However, this was not statistically significant in this pilot trial (p = 0.498). A total of seven patients required further surgery in the locking-plate group and one in the intramedullary nail group.

This study suggests that there may be clinically relevant, functional differences in patients treated with nail versus locking-plate fixation for fractures of the distal tibia and differences in related complications. Further trials are required to confirm the findings of this pilot investigation.

Objectives

To study the vascularity and bone metabolism of the femoral head/neck following hip resurfacing arthroplasty, and to use these results to compare the posterior and the trochanteric-flip approaches.

The poor reporting and use of statistical methods in orthopaedic papers has been widely discussed by both clinicians and statisticians. A detailed review of research published in general orthopaedic journals was undertaken to assess the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting. A representative sample of 100 papers was assessed for compliance to CONSORT and STROBE guidelines and the quality of the statistical reporting was assessed using a validated questionnaire. Overall compliance with CONSORT and STROBE guidelines in our study was 59% and 58% respectively, with very few papers fulfilling all criteria. In 37% of papers patient numbers were inadequately reported; 20% of papers introduced new statistical methods in the ‘results’ section not previously reported in the ‘methods’ section, and 23% of papers reported no measurement of error with the main outcome measure. Taken together, these issues indicate a general lack of statistical rigour and are consistent with similar reviews undertaken in a number of other scientific and clinical research disciplines. It is imperative that the orthopaedic research community strives to improve the quality of reporting; a failure to do so could seriously limit the development of future research.

Between May 1998 and May 2007 we carried out 50 Avon patellofemoral joint replacements in 32 patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis.

There were no revisions in the first five years, giving a cumulative survival of 100% for those with a minimum follow-up of five years. The mean follow-up was 5.3 years (2.1 to 10.2). The median Oxford knee score was 30.5 (interquartile range 22.25 to 42.25). In patients with bilateral replacements the median Euroqol General health score was 50 which was significantly lower than that of 75 in those with a unilateral replacement (p = 0.047). The main complication was progression of disease, which was identified radiologically in 11 knees (22%). This highlights the need for accurate selection of patients. Our findings suggest that the Avon prosthesis survives well and gives a satisfactory functional outcome in the medium term.