header advert
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 5 | Pages 359 - 366
1 May 2022
Sadekar V Watts AT Moulder E Souroullas P Hadland Y Barron E Muir R Sharma HK


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.


We identified consecutive patients from our departmental database. Both trauma and elective cases were included, of all ages, frame types, and pathologies who underwent circular frame treatment. Our protocol is either a single-stage or two-stage process implemented by defunctioning the frame, in order to progressively increase the weightbearing load through the bone, and promote full loading prior to frame removal. Before progression, through the process we monitor patients for any increase in pain and assess radiographs for deformity or refracture.

The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 2 | Pages 279 - 285
1 Feb 2021
Ferguson D Harwood P Allgar V Roy A Foster P Taylor M Moulder E Sharma H


Pin-site infection remains a significant problem for patients treated by external fixation. A randomized trial was undertaken to compare the weekly use of alcoholic chlorhexidine (CHX) for pin-site care with an emollient skin preparation in patients with a tibial fracture treated with a circular frame.


Patients were randomized to use either 0.5% CHX or Dermol (DML) 500 emollient pin-site care. A skin biopsy was taken from the tibia during surgery to measure the dermal and epidermal thickness and capillary, macrophage, and T-cell counts per high-powered field. The pH and hydration of the skin were measured preoperatively, at follow-up, and if pin-site infection occurred. Pin-site infection was defined using a validated clinical system.

The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 88-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1584 - 1590
1 Dec 2006
Hook S Moulder E Yates PJ Burston BJ Whitley E Bannister GC

We reviewed 142 consecutive primary total hip replacements implanted into 123 patients between 1988 and 1993 using the Exeter Universal femoral stem. A total of 74 patients (88 hips) had survived for ten years or more and were reviewed at a mean of 12.7 years (10 to 17). There was no loss to follow-up.

The rate of revision of the femoral component for aseptic loosening and osteolysis was 1.1% (1 stem), that for revision for any cause was 2.2% (2 stems), and for re-operation for any cause was 21.6% (19 hips). Re-operation was because of failure of the acetabular component in all but two hips.

All but one femoral component subsided within the cement mantle to a mean of 1.52 mm (0 to 8.3) at the final follow-up. One further stem had subsided excessively (8 mm) and had lucent lines at the cement-stem and cement-bone interfaces. This was classified as a radiological failure and is awaiting revision. One stem was revised for deep infection and one for excessive peri-articular osteolysis. Defects of the cement mantle (Barrack grade C and D) were found in 28% of stems (25 hips), associated with increased subsidence (p = 0.01), but were not associated with endosteal lysis or failure.

Peri-articular osteolysis was significantly related to the degree of polyethylene wear (p < 0.001), which was in turn associated with a younger age (p = 0.01) and male gender (p < 0.001).

The use of the Exeter metal-backed acetabular component was a notable failure with 12 of 32 hips (37.5%) revised for loosening. The Harris-Galante components failed with excessive wear, osteolysis and dislocation with 15% revised (5 of 33 hips). Only one of 23 hips with a cemented Elite component (4%) was revised for loosening and osteolysis.

Our findings show that the Exeter Universal stem implanted outside the originating centre has excellent medium-term results.