Aims

The timing of when to remove a circular frame is crucial; early removal results in refracture or deformity, while late removal increases the patient morbidity and delay in return to work. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a staged reloading protocol. We report the incidence of mechanical failure following both single-stage and two stage reloading protocols and analyze the associated risk factors.

Nanotechnology is the study, production and controlled manipulation of materials with a grain size < 100 nm. At this level, the laws of classical mechanics fall away and those of quantum mechanics take over, resulting in unique behaviour of matter in terms of melting point, conductivity and reactivity. Additionally, and likely more significant, as grain size decreases, the ratio of surface area to volume drastically increases, allowing for greater interaction between implants and the surrounding cellular environment. This favourable increase in surface area plays an important role in mesenchymal cell differentiation and ultimately bone–implant interactions.

Basic science and translational research have revealed important potential applications for nanotechnology in orthopaedic surgery, particularly with regard to improving the interaction between implants and host bone. Nanophase materials more closely match the architecture of native trabecular bone, thereby greatly improving the osseo-integration of orthopaedic implants. Nanophase-coated prostheses can also reduce bacterial adhesion more than conventionally surfaced prostheses. Nanophase selenium has shown great promise when used for tumour reconstructions, as has nanophase silver in the management of traumatic wounds. Nanophase silver may significantly improve healing of peripheral nerve injuries, and nanophase gold has powerful anti-inflammatory effects on tendon inflammation.

Considerable advances must be made in our understanding of the potential health risks of production, implantation and wear patterns of nanophase devices before they are approved for clinical use. Their potential, however, is considerable, and is likely to benefit us all in the future.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B: 569–73.

The ability of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) to differentiate in vitro into chondrocytes, osteocytes and myocytes holds great promise for tissue engineering. Skeletal defects are emerging as key targets for treatment using MSCs due to the high responsiveness of bone to interventions in animal models. Interest in MSCs has further expanded in recognition of their ability to release growth factors and to adjust immune responses.

Despite their increasing application in clinical trials, the origin and role of MSCs in the development, repair and regeneration of organs have remained unclear. Until recently, MSCs could only be isolated in a process that requires culture in a laboratory; these cells were being used for tissue engineering without understanding their native location and function. MSCs isolated in this indirect way have been used in clinical trials and remain the reference standard cellular substrate for musculoskeletal engineering. The therapeutic use of autologous MSCs is currently limited by the need for ex vivo expansion and by heterogeneity within MSC preparations. The recent discovery that the walls of blood vessels harbour native precursors of MSCs has led to their prospective identification and isolation. MSCs may therefore now be purified from dispensable tissues such as lipo-aspirate and returned for clinical use in sufficient quantity, negating the requirement for ex vivo expansion and a second surgical procedure.

In this annotation we provide an update on the recent developments in the understanding of the identity of MSCs within tissues and outline how this may affect their use in orthopaedic surgery in the future.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:291–8.

Peri-prosthetic osteolysis and subsequent aseptic loosening is the most common reason for revising total hip replacements. Wear particles originating from the prosthetic components interact with multiple cell types in the peri-prosthetic region resulting in an inflammatory process that ultimately leads to peri-prosthetic bone loss. These cells include macrophages, osteoclasts, osteoblasts and fibroblasts. The majority of research in peri-prosthetic osteolysis has concentrated on the role played by osteoclasts and macrophages. The purpose of this review is to assess the role of the osteoblast in peri-prosthetic osteolysis.

In peri-prosthetic osteolysis, wear particles may affect osteoblasts and contribute to the osteolytic process by two mechanisms. First, particles and metallic ions have been shown to inhibit the osteoblast in terms of its ability to secrete mineralised bone matrix, by reducing calcium deposition, alkaline phosphatase activity and its ability to proliferate. Secondly, particles and metallic ions have been shown to stimulate osteoblasts to produce pro inflammatory mediators in vitro. In vivo, these mediators have the potential to attract pro-inflammatory cells to the peri-prosthetic area and stimulate osteoclasts to absorb bone. Further research is needed to fully define the role of the osteoblast in peri-prosthetic osteolysis and to explore its potential role as a therapeutic target in this condition.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1021–5.