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.

Mobile-bearing (MB) total knee replacement (TKR) was introduced to reduce the risk of aseptic loosening and wear of polyethylene inserts. However, no consistent clinical advantages of mobile- over fixed-bearing (FB) TKR have been found. In this study we evaluated whether mobile bearings have an advantage over fixed bearings with regard to revision rates and clinical outcome scores. Furthermore, we determined which modifying variables affected the outcome.

A systematic search of the literature was conducted to collect clinical trials comparing MB and FB in primary TKR. The primary outcomes were revision rates for any reason, aseptic loosening and wear. Secondary outcomes included range of movement, Knee Society score (KSS), Oxford knee score (OKS), Short-Form 12 (SF-12) score and radiological parameters. Meta-regression techniques were used to explore factors modifying the observed effect.

Our search yielded 1827 publications, of which 41 studies met our inclusion criteria, comprising over 6000 TKRs. Meta-analyses showed no clinically relevant differences in terms of revision rates, clinical outcome scores or patient-reported outcome measures between MB and FB TKRs. It appears that theoretical assumptions of superiority of MB over FB TKR are not borne out in clinical practice.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1209–16.

The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation.

In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group.

Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation.

The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398–404.

Patellofemoral complications are common after total knee replacement (TKR). Leaving the patellar unsurfaced after TKR may lead to complications such as anterior knee pain, and re-operation to surface it. Complications after patellar resurfacing include patellar fracture, aseptic loosening, patellar instability, polyethylene wear, patellar clunk and osteonecrosis. Historically, patellar complications account for one of the larger proportions of causes of failure in TKR, however, with contemporary implant designs, complication rates have decreased. Most remaining failures relate to patellofemoral tracking. Understanding the causes of patellofemoral maltracking is essential to prevent these complications as well as manage them when they occur.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):84–6.

Squeaking arising from a ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) total hip replacement (THR) may cause patient concern and in some cases causes patients to seek revision surgery. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the incidence of squeaking and the incidence of revision surgery for squeaking. A total of 43 studies including 16 828 CoC THR that reported squeaking, or revision for squeaking, were entered into the analysis. The incidence of squeaking was 4.2% and the incidence of revision for squeaking was 0.2%. The incidence of squeaking in patients receiving the Accolade femoral stem was 8.3%, and the incidence of revision for squeaking in these patients was 1.3%.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:181–7.

Large ceramic femoral heads offer several advantages that are potentially advantageous to patients undergoing both primary and revision total hip replacement. Many high-quality studies have demonstrated the benefit of large femoral heads in reducing post-operative instability. Ceramic femoral heads may also offer an advantage in reducing polyethylene wear that has been reported in vitro and is starting to become clinically apparent in mid-term clinical outcome studies. Additionally, the risk of taper corrosion at a ceramic femoral head–neck junction is clearly lower than when using a metal femoral head. With improvements in the material properties of both modern ceramic femoral heads and polyethylene acetabular liners that have reduced the risk of mechanical complications, large ceramic heads have gained popularity in recent years.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:63–6.

Objectives

Third-body wear is believed to be one trigger for adverse results with metal-on-metal (MOM) bearings. Impingement and subluxation may release metal particles from MOM replacements. We therefore challenged MOM bearings with relevant debris types of cobalt–chrome alloy (CoCr), titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) and polymethylmethacrylate bone cement (PMMA).

The December 2014 Children’s orthopaedics Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: predicting drift in supracondylar fractures; do normal hips dislocate?; the burden of trampoline fractures; muscle eversion activity is strongly predictive of outcome in CTEV; the modified Dunn osteotomy; plaster and moulded casts; and psychology and fractures.

The December 2014 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Sports and total hips; topical tranexamic acid and blood conservation in hip replacement; blind spots and biases in hip research; no recurrence in cam lesions at two years; to drain or not to drain?; sonication and diagnosis of implant associated infection; and biomarkers and periprosthetic infection

The purpose of this study was to undertake a meta-analysis to determine whether there is lower polyethylene wear and longer survival when using mobile-bearing implants in total knee replacement when compared with fixed-bearing implants. Of 975 papers identified, 34 trials were eligible for data extraction and meta-analysis comprising 4754 patients (6861 knees). We found no statistically significant differences between the two designs in terms of the incidence of radiolucent lines, osteolysis, aseptic loosening or survival. There is thus currently no evidence to suggest that the use of mobile-bearing designs reduce polyethylene wear and prolong survival after total knee replacement.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1057–63.

We have compared three different methods of treating symptomatic non-traumatic tears of the supraspinatus tendon in patients above 55 years of age. A total of 180 shoulders (173 patients) with supraspinatus tendon tears were randomly allocated into one of three groups (each of 60 shoulders); physiotherapy (group 1), acromioplasty and physiotherapy (group 2) and rotator cuff repair, acromioplasty and physiotherapy (group 3). The Constant score was assessed and followed up by an independent observer pre-operatively and at three, six and twelve months after the intervention.

Of these, 167 shoulders were available for assessment at one year (follow-up rate of 92.8%). There were 55 shoulders in group 1 (24 in males and 31 in females, mean age 65 years (55 to 79)), 57 in group 2 (29 male and 28 female, mean age 65 years (55 to 79)) and 55 shoulders in group 3 (26 male and 29 female, mean age 65 years (55 to 81)). There were no between-group differences in the Constant score at final follow-up: 74.1 (sd 14.2), 77.2 (sd 13.0) and 77.9 (sd 12.1) in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively (p = 0.34). The mean change in the Constant score was 17.0, 17.5, and 19.8, respectively (p = 0.34). These results suggest that at one-year follow-up, operative treatment is no better than conservative treatment with regard to non-traumatic supraspinatus tears, and that conservative treatment should be considered as the primary method of treatment for this condition.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:75–81.

The routine use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in evaluating the outcome after arthroplasty by healthcare organisations reflects a growing recognition of the importance of patients’ perspectives in improving treatment. Although widely embraced in the NHS, there are concerns that PROMs are being used beyond their means due to a poor understanding of their limitations.

This paper reviews some of the current challenges in using PROMs to evaluate total knee arthroplasty. It highlights alternative methods that have been used to improve the assessment of outcome.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:3–9.

There has been an in increase in the availability of effective biological agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis as well as a shift towards early diagnosis and management of the inflammatory process. This article explores the impact this may have on the place of orthopaedic surgery in the management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1287–9

Metaphyseal bone loss is common with revision total knee replacement (RTKR). Using the Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) classification, type 2-B and type 3 defects usually require large metal blocks, bulk structural allograft or highly porous metal cones. Tibial and femoral trabecular metal metaphyseal cones are a unique solution for large bone defects. These cones substitute for bone loss, improve metaphyseal fixation, help correct malalignment, restore the joint line and may permit use of a shorter stem. The technique for insertion involves sculpturing of the remaining bone with a high speed burr and rasp, followed by press-fit of the cone into the metaphysis. The fixation and osteoconductive properties of the porous cone outer surface allow ingrowth and encourage long-term biological fixation. The revision knee component is then cemented into the porous cone inner surface, which provides superior fixation compared with cementing into native but deficient metaphyseal bone. The advantages of the cone compared with allograft include: technical ease, biological fixation, no resorption, and possibly a lower risk of infection. The disadvantages include: difficult extraction and relatively short-term follow-up. Several studies using cones report promising short-term results for the reconstruction of large bone defects in RTKR.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):118–21.

The February 2014 Research Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: blood supply to the femoral head after dislocation; diabetes and hip replacement; bone remodelling over two decades following hip replacement; sham surgery as good as arthroscopic meniscectomy; distraction in knee osteoarthritis; whether joint replacement prevent cardiac events; tranexamic acid and knee replacement haemostasis; cartilage colonisation in bipolar ankle grafts; CTs and proof of fusion; atorvastatin for muscle re-innervation after sciatic nerve transection; microfracture and short-term pain in cuff repair; promising early results from L-PRF augmented cuff repairs; and fatty degeneration in a rodent model.

The most common reasons for revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are loosening and pain. Cementless components may reduce the revision rate. The aim of this study was to compare the fixation and clinical outcome of cementless and cemented Oxford UKAs.

A total of 43 patients were randomised to receive either a cemented or a cementless Oxford UKA and were followed for two years with radiostereometric analysis (RSA), radiographs aligned with the bone–implant interfaces and clinical scores.

The femoral components migrated significantly during the first year (mean 0.2 mm) but not during the second. There was no significant difference in the extent of migration between cemented and cementless femoral components in either the first or the second year. In the first year the cementless tibial components subsided significantly more than the cemented components (mean 0.28 mm (sd 0.17) vs. 0.09 mm (sd 0.19 mm)). In the second year, although there was a small amount of subsidence (mean 0.05 mm) there was no significant difference (p = 0.92) between cemented and cementless tibial components. There were no femoral radiolucencies. Tibial radiolucencies were narrow (< 1 mm) and were significantly (p = 0.02) less common with cementless (6 of 21) than cemented (13 of 21) components at two years. There were no complete radiolucencies with cementless components, whereas five of 21 (24%) cemented components had complete radiolucencies. The clinical scores at two years were not significantly different (p = 0.20).

As second-year migration is predictive of subsequent loosening, and as radiolucency is suggestive of reduced implant–bone contact, these data suggest that fixation of the cementless components is at least as good as, if not better than, that of cemented devices.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:185–91.

Previous studies of failure mechanisms leading to revision total knee replacement (TKR) performed between 1986 and 2000 determined that many failed early, with a disproportionate amount accounted for by infection and implant-associated factors including wear, loosening and instability. Since then, efforts have been made to improve implant performance and instruct surgeons in best practice. Recently our centre participated in a multi-centre evaluation of 844 revision TKRs from 2010 to 2011. The purpose was to report a detailed analysis of failure mechanisms over time and to see if failure modes have changed over the past 10 to 15 years. Aseptic loosening was the predominant mechanism of failure (31.2%), followed by instability (18.7%), infection (16.2%), polyethylene wear (10.0%), arthrofibrosis (6.9%) and malalignment (6.6%). The mean time to failure was 5.9 years (ten days to 31 years), 35.3% of all revisions occurred at less than two years, and 60.2% in the first five years. With improvements in implant and polyethylene manufacture, polyethylene wear is no longer a leading cause of failure. Early mechanisms of failure are primarily technical errors. In addition to improving implant longevity, industry and surgeons must work together to decrease these technical errors. All reports on failure of TKR contain patients with unexplained pain who not infrequently have unmet expectations. Surgeons must work to achieve realistic patient expectations pre-operatively, and therefore, improve patient satisfaction post-operatively.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):101–4.

Objectives

Traumatic brachial plexus injury causes severe functional impairment of the arm. Elbow flexion is often affected. Nerve surgery or tendon transfers provide the only means to obtain improved elbow flexion. Unfortunately, the functionality of the arm often remains insufficient. Stem cell therapy could potentially improve muscle strength and avoid muscle-tendon transfer. This pilot study assesses the safety and regenerative potential of autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cell injection in partially denervated biceps.

In the UK we have many surgeon inventors – surgeons who innovate and create new ways of doing things, who invent operations, who design new instruments to facilitate surgery or design new implants for using in patients. However truly successful surgeon inventors are a rare breed and they need to develop additional knowledge and skills during their career in order to push forward their devices and innovations. This article reviews my own experiences as a surgeon inventor and the highs and lows over the whole of my surgical career.