The Pauwels classification for intracapsular hip fractures: is it reliable?

The Pauwels classification for the femoral neck fracture is still broadly used in literature and clinical practise. However, this classification has never been tested for its reliability in terms of inter-observer agreement. We assessed whether or not it is reliable to use the Pauwels classification in pre-operative planning.Ten observers classified 100 intra-capsular femur fractures. The inter-observer agreement was calculated using the multi-rater Fleiss’ kappa.The Pauwels classification showed an inter-observer agreement of κ0.31 (0.01).Classification of intra-capsular hip fractures according to the Pauwels classification using the Pauwels angle is unreliable and its use should be avoided.     

Accommodation: does it apply to human leukocyte antigens?

The term "accommodation" was invoked to describe endothelial cell resistance to antibody-mediated rejection after ABO-incompatible kidney or experimental xenograft transplantation. Currently, there is much interest in how to achieve successful human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-incompatible allograft transplantation in HLA-sensitized patients and how to treat antibody-mediated rejection after ABO-compatible HLA-incompatible allotransplantation. The term "accommodation" is often used interchangeably to describe patients who have donor-specific ABO or HLA alloantibodies in the absence of damage to their allograft. Here, we suggest that there are important differences between the immune responses to protein versus carbohydrate antigens and that graft HLA molecules may respond differently to antibodies (and antibody isotypes) than ABO antigens. Neither the mechanisms nor a phenotype of accommodation have been defined fully. Further research is needed to define mechanisms of both resistance and susceptibility to antibody-mediated injury and to predict under which circumstances allograft accommodation may occur.     

The contralateral hip in slipped capital femoral epiphysis: Is there an easy-to-use algorithm to support a decision for prophylactic fixation?

Purpose:To identify a specific factor that can support the decision for prophylactic fixation in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis.Methods:This retrospective cohort study included a total national population of 379 children diagnosed with slipped capital femoral epiphysis from 2007 to 2013. Regression analysis used information on slip severity, clinical classification of the index hip, age, sex, age-adjusted body mass index, the difference in epiphyseal–diaphyseal angle, and comorbidity to identify any risk factor for the subsequent development of a slip in the contralateral hip. Four observers evaluated the triradiate cartilage following the modified Oxford bone score grade. The occurrence of later development of a contralateral slip in different stage of physeal closure was used to analyze the sensitivity and specificity for this method.Results:This study’s only predictor for a subsequent contralateral slip was chronological age. At age 13 years or older, 1/15 in girls and 3/65 in boys suffered from a slip in the contralateral hip. Thus, when using age <13 years as a test for deciding when to do prophylactic fixation, the sensitivity would be 88% and specificity 51% for preventing contralateral slip. However, the correlation between the four different observers was too low to be considered useful when assessing the triradiate cartilage for skeletal maturity.Conclusion:We would advocate a prophylactic fixation for children <13 years diagnosed with a unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis as an easy-to-use algorithm.Level of evidence:level II.     

The impact of time to surgery after hip fracture on mortality at 30- and 90-days: Does a single benchmark apply to all?

IntroductionDelays to surgery after hip fracture have been associated with mortality Uncertainty remains as to what timing benchmark should be utilized as a marker of quality of care and how other patient factors might also influence the impact of time to surgery on mortality. The goal of this study was to determine how time to surgery affects 30- and 90-day mortality by age and to explore the impact of preoperative comorbid burden and sex.ParticipantsWe used population-based administrative data from a Canadian province collected from 01April2008 to 31March2015. Of 12,713 Albertans 50-years and older who experienced a hip fracture and underwent surgery within 100 h of admission, 11,996 (94.8%) provided data.MethodsTime to surgery was analyzed in hours from admission to surgery. Age and the interaction between age and time to surgery were evaluated using logistic regression. Charlson co-morbidity score and sex were also considered in the analysis. Survival was evaluated at 30-and 90-days post hip fracture using a provincial registry.ResultsThe average age of the cohort was 79.6 ± 11.2 years and 8,412 (70.1%) were female. Overall, 586 (4.9%) patients died within 30-days and 1,023 (8.5%) died within 90-days of hip fracture. Mortality increased significantly with increasing time to surgery (30-day mortality odds ratio [OR] = 1.03; 95%CI 1.01-1.05: 90-day mortality OR = 1.03; 95% CI 1.01–1.04). Mortality also increased substantially with increasing age; those ≥85 years were 19.63 (95% CI 6.83–67.33) and 15.66 (95%CI 7.20–37.16) times the odds more likely to die relative to those between 50–64 years of age at 30-days and 90-days postoperatively respectively. Further, those who were ≥85 years were more significantly affected by increasing time to surgery than those who were 50–64 years of age at both 30-days (p = 0.04) and 90-days (p = 0.025) post-fracture. Males and those with a higher comorbid burden also had higher odds of dying after controlling for time to surgery (p < 0.001)ConclusionTime to surgery following hip fracture may have a differential effect on 30- and 90-day survival dependent on age. Older patients appear to be at higher risk of dying with surgical delays than younger patients.     

New materials for hip and knee joint replacement: What's hip and what's in kneed?

Over the last three decades there have been significant advancements in the knee and hip replacement technology that has been driven by an issue in the past concerning adverse local tissue reactions, aseptic and septic loosening. The implants and the materials we utilize have improved over the last two decades and in knee and hip replacement there has been a decrease in the failures attributed to wear and osteolysis. Despite these advancements there are still issues with patient satisfaction and early revisions due to septic and aseptic loosening in knee replacement patients. This article reviews the state of current implant material technology in hip and knee replacement surgery, discusses some of the unmet needs we have in biomaterials, and reviews some of the current biomaterials and technology that may be able to solve the most common issues in the knee and hip replacement surgery.     

Does the obesity paradox apply to early postoperative complications after hip surgery? A retrospective chart review

BackgroundThere is evidence that very obese patients (body mass index [BMI] > 40 kg/m²) undergoing hip replacement have longer average hospital stays, as well as higher rates of complications and readmission compared with patients with normal BMI. However, there are sparse data describing how overweight and obese patients fare in the period immediately after hip replacement surgery compared with patients with low or normal BMI. In this study, we sought to explore the association of BMI with the rate of early postoperative complications in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.MethodsA proprietary hospital software program, Clinical Looking Glass was used to query the Montefiore Medical Center database and create a list of patients with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code 81.51 (hip replacement) from the period of January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012. The medical records of patients with length of stay 5 or more days were reviewed to evaluate the reason for the extended stay. The primary outcome studied was the association between BMI and occurrence of early complications in patients who had undergone total hip replacement surgery. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the association of BMI and early postoperative complications.ResultsOf the 802 patients undergoing hip replacement surgery within our time frame, 142 patient medical records were reviewed due to their length of stay of ≥ 5 days. Overall complication rate in the analyzed patients demonstrated a J-curve distribution pattern, with the highest morbidity being 23.5% in the underweight group, the second highest in the normal-weight group (17.3%), and decreasing to nadir in the overweight (8.0%) and obese class I (10.0%) and then higher again in classes II (14.3%) and III (16.7%). Adjusted ORs demonstrated the same J distribution pattern similar to the pattern observed in the univariate analysis. Of the variables studied, Charlson score (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2; P = .03), diagnosis of hip fracture (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 2.8-9.8; P = .01), normal weight (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.8; P = .04), and obese class III (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-6.3; P = .04) were the factors associated with the highest odds of early complications after hip replacement surgery.ConclusionsIn this retrospective review of hip replacement surgery patients, BMI classification was a predictor of early postoperative complications. Although the exact underlying mechanisms are still not clear, these results are consistent with the obesity paradox, in which obesity or its correlates provide some form of protection.     

Connecting bar for hip spica reinforcement: does it help?

The purpose of this prospective study was to determine if a connecting bar prevented mechanical failure of hip spicas. Eighty-two hip spicas were applied to 70 patients between April 2000 and June 2001 following open or closed reduction for developmental dysplasia of the hip. Bilateral hip surgery was undertaken in 12 patients. Thirty-six spicas were applied with a bar whilst 46 were without. The technique of application was similar in all patients. Overall nine (11%) hip spicas failed (mechanically) prematurely and had to be replaced in hospital under general anaesthesia. All nine were inpatients whose spica did not have a connecting bar (P < 0.005). The rate of spica revision increased with the age of the patient. All parents of failed spica cases (nine cases) preferred the new spica with a bar to the previous one without, because they agreed that the bar made the spica more secure. The bar did not hamper toileting or handling.     

Surgery for hip fractures: Does surgical delay affect outcomes?

Hip fractures are associated with a high rate of mortality and profound temporary and sometimes permanent impairment of quality of life. Current guidelines indicate that surgeons should perform surgery for a hip fracture within 24 hours of injury because earlier surgery is associated with better functional outcome and lower rates of perioperative complications and mortality. Proponents of early treatment argue that this approach minimizes the length of time a patient is confined to bed rest, thereby reducing the risk for associated complications, such as pressure sores, deep vein thrombosis, and urinary tract infections. Those favoring delaying surgery beyond the guideline recommendations believe that this approach is required to medically optimize patients, and therefore decrease the risk for perioperative complications. Further challenges to resolving this debate is the lack of an accepted definition of what should constitute an “unacceptable delay” for hip fracture surgery and the fact that outcomes associated with surgical delay are based on observational data alone (i.e., not randomized controlled trials). The effect of preoperative timing on mortality and other patient-important outcomes across various age groups remains controversial and warrants a large randomized controlled trial to offer clear insights into the effects associated with early versus delayed surgery among hip fracture patients.     

Patient selection criteria for primary total hip Arthroplasty in displaced intracapsular hip fractures: Are they appropriate?

Introduction:   

This study aims to determine, by outcome analysis, the appropriateness of current criteria employed to select patients for total hip arthroplasty (THA) as the primary treatment for displaced intracapsular hip fracture (DICHF). This study is intended to inform prospective randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of THA as a primary treatment.     

Manipulation for stiffness following total knee arthroplasty: when and how often to do it?

Stiffness following total knee arthroplasty is a disabling complication. One of the management options of stiffness includes manipulation under anaesthesia, but no real consensus exist on appropriate timing of intervention, and the timing and results of the manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) are under debate in the literature. Our aim was to determine the efficacy of single and multiple manipulations under anaesthesia following total knee arthroplasty and to determine the most appropriate timing for manipulation. We retrospectively reviewed 86 patients who underwent manipulation for stiffness following primary total knee replacement with at least 1-year follow-up. Range of motion before surgery, at the time of the MUA, immediately after MUA and at 6 weeks and 1 year post-MUA were recorded. At the end of 1 year post-manipulation, manipulations performed at less than 20 weeks, following primary total knee arthroplasty, showed 31° of flexion gain as compared to only 1.5° of flexion gain when manipulation was undertaken after 20 weeks. Of the 86 patients, 21 had multiple manipulations with no significant difference in flexion gain after the second manipulation. Patients on warfarin (26 %) had an increased incidence of stiffness and poor flexion gain. This study showed that better results were achieved when manipulation was performed at less than 20 weeks (particularly between 12 and 14 weeks) from primary surgery with no added benefit from re-manipulations.     

The evidence for single-incision laparoscopic colectomy: is it time to adopt?

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has advantages over open surgery including shorter postoperative length of hospital stay, early return of bowel function, decreased complications and reduced postoperative pain. Innovative minimally invasive surgery techniques such as single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SIL) have emerged to further enhance outcomes of conventional laparoscopy. This technique uses a single small incision for access of all instruments and specimen extraction. This concept has been proposed to improve cosmesis and enhance recovery. Technological advances have been introduced to overcome the challenges of co-axial instrument movement and collision that is inherent to SIL surgery. The application of SIL techniques to colorectal surgery is in its infancy, but gaining significant momentum. Early case reports and series have shown feasibility and safety. Emerging comparative studies of SIL colectomy to standard laparoscopic techniques are providing evidence of equivalency with potential benefit in outcomes such as reduced early postoperative pain and shortened length of hospital stay. The application of the SIL platform to robotics and transanal surgery demonstrates the broadening scope of this innovative field. However, we must be cognizant of the impact on surgeon training and resident education. In this review we present the current evidence supporting the application of SIL to colorectal surgery.     

Brake response time after total knee arthroplasty: when is it safe for patients to drive?

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) dramatically decreases pain and improves mobility and quality of life. However, little has been reported on its effect on driving ability in the early postoperative period. This prospective study was conducted to compare preoperative and postoperative brake response times (BRTs) in patients undergoing TKA for osteoarthritis. The results showed that patients returned to preoperative BRT as early as 3 weeks after surgery, and at 9 weeks after surgery, BRTs were significantly improved over baseline. Based on BRT analysis patients undergoing TKA may be allowed to return to driving 6 weeks after surgery.     

Perioperative urinary catheterisation in conjunction with epidural anaesthesia for hip and knee arthroplasty. Is it safe?

The place of indwelling urinary catheterisation following epidural anaesthesia to prevent acute retention of urine after hip and knee arthroplasty is controversial. Even with the use of aseptic techniques and closed sterile drainage, bacteriuria has been reported in 10-27% of catheterised patients. A prospective trial was carried out in 68 consecutive patients undergoing knee or hip joint arthroplasty with epidural anaesthesia to investigate the perioperative complications of short term urinary catheterisation. Following establishment of combined epidural and general anaesthesia, all patients underwent urinary catheterisation under aseptic technique by a member of the surgical team. Prophylactic antibiotics were given prior to insertion and continued for 24-48h postoperatively to minimise the risk of prosthetic infection. The mean indwelling urinary catheter (IDC) period was 3.6 days (range 2-14). There were three (4.4%) urinary tract infections (UTIs) all of which resolved with appropriate antibiotics. Two were detected upon removal of the urinary catheter and one was detected on the seventh postoperative day when symptoms were detected. No patient required recatheterisation. There was no other infective morbidity or wound infection. Our findings suggest the use of IDC for short periods combined with prophylactic antibiotics is safe in the perioperative phase of joint arthroplasty.