The management of bone loss in revision
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains an immediate
threat to patients following total hip and knee replacement. While
there is a strong consensus that steps should be taken to minimise
the risk to patients by utilising some forms of prophylaxis for
the vast majority of patients, the methods utilised have been extremely
variable. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been published
by various professional organisations for over 25 years to provide recommendations
to standardise VTE prophylaxis. Historically, these recommendations
have varied widely depending in underlying assumptions, goals, and
methodology of the various groups. This effort has previously been
exemplified by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and
the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). The former
group of medical specialists targeted minimising venographically
proven deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (the vast majority of which are
asymptomatic) as their primary goal prior to 2012. The latter group of
surgeons targeted minimising symptomatic VTE. As a result prior
to 2012, the recommendations of the two groups were widely divergent.
In the past year, both groups have reassessed the current literature
with the principal goals of minimising symptomatic VTE events and
bleeding complications. As a result, for the first time the CPGs
of these two major subspecialty organisations are in close agreement.
This article considers the establishment, purpose and conduct of knee arthroplasty registers using the Swedish register as an example. The methods of collection of appropriate data, the cost, and the ways in which this information may be used are considered.