Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreaded complications after arthroplasty surgery; thus numerous approaches have been undertaken to equip metal surfaces with antibacterial properties. Due to its antimicrobial effects, silver is a promising coating for metallic surfaces, and several types of silver-coated arthroplasty implants are in clinical use today. However, silver can also exert toxic effects on eukaryotic cells both in the immediate vicinity of the coated implants and systemically. In most clinically-used implants, silver coatings are applied on bulk components that are not in direct contact with bone, such as in partial or total long bone arthroplasties used in tumour or complex revision surgery. These implants differ considerably in the coating method, total silver content, and silver release rates. Safety issues, such as the occurrence of argyria, have been a cause for concern, and the efficacy of silver coatings in terms of preventing PJI is also controversial. The application of silver coatings is uncommon on parts of implants intended for cementless fixation in host bone, but this option might be highly desirable since the modification of implant surfaces in order to improve osteoconductivity can also increase bacterial adhesion. Therefore, an optimal silver content that inhibits bacterial colonization while maintaining osteoconductivity is crucial if silver were to be applied as a coating on parts intended for bone contact. This review summarizes the different methods used to apply silver coatings to arthroplasty components, with a focus on the amount and duration of silver release from the different coatings; the available experience with silver-coated implants that are in clinical use today; and future strategies to balance the effects of silver on bacteria and eukaryotic cells, and to develop silver-coated titanium components suitable for bone ingrowth. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):423–429

Many radiographic techniques have been described for measuring patellar height. They can be divided into two groups: those that relate the position of the patella to the femur (direct) and those that relate it to the tibia (indirect). This article looks at the methods that have been described, the logic behind their conception and the critical analyses that have been performed to test them.

The anatomical studies, basic to our understanding of lumbar spine innervation through the sinu-vertebral nerves, are reviewed. Research in the 1980s suggested that pain sensation was conducted in part via the sympathetic system. These sensory pathways have now been clarified using sophisticated experimental and histochemical techniques confirming a dual pattern. One route enters the adjacent dorsal root segmentally, whereas the other supply is non-segmental ascending through the paravertebral sympathetic chain with re-entry through the thoracolumbar white rami communicantes.

Sensory nerve endings in the degenerative lumbar disc penetrate deep into the disrupted nucleus pulposus, insensitive in the normal lumbar spine. Complex as well as free nerve endings would appear to contribute to pain transmission.

The nature and mechanism of discogenic pain is still speculative but there is growing evidence to support a ‘visceral pain’ hypothesis, unique in the muscloskeletal system. This mechanism is open to ‘peripheral sensitisation’ and possibly ‘central sensitisation’ as a potential cause of chronic back pain.