Enoxaparin Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Venous Thromboembolism in Asians Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BackgroundThe introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) shows promise for their role as a chemoprophylaxis agent after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, existing studies are largely based on Western populations that do not account for the different risk profiles and lower rates of VTE in Asians. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of DOACs compared with enoxaparin in an Asian-based population study.MethodsThe review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All studies that compared outcomes between enoxaparin and DOACs as VTE prophylaxis after TKA in the Asian population were included.ResultsFive studies with 121,153 patients were included. DOACs demonstrated a convincing benefit over enoxaparin in overall VTE prevention (odds ratio [OR] = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.74). However, although the OR trended in favor of DOACs for the reduction of deep vein thrombosis events (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.20-1.48) and pulmonary embolism (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.07-8.20), statistical significance was not reached. In terms of bleeding complications, both arms had similar rates of major (0.91% vs 0.20%), clinically relevant nonmajor (3.28% vs 2.94%), and minor bleeding complications (12.8 vs 13.3%). A nonsignificance advantage of enoxaparin over DOACs was revealed in the OR for major bleeding (OR = 3.17; 95% CI: 0.81-12.43), whereas DOACs were favored to reduce risk of clinically relevant nonmajor (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.01-91.51) and minor bleeding (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.11-5.33).ConclusionDOACs confer a significantly reduced rate of overall VTE compared with enoxaparin in Asians after TKA. No significant differences in deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and rates of bleeding complications exist.     

Femoral neck shaft angle is not correlated with femoral version: A retrospective study of computed tomography scans

BackgroundAn understanding of femoral anteversion and neck-shaft angle (NSA) is essential to deliver optimal orthopaedic surgical care. Despite the importance, there is little research examining the relationship between femoral anteversion and the NSA in an adult population. This study sought to determine if there is a correlation between femoral neck shaft angle and version in skeletally mature adults using computed tomography (CT) scanograms.MethodsBetween January 2010 and June 2017, all skeletally mature patients who had received a CT scanogram of the lower extremity were reviewed. Exclusion criteria included: (1) radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis, (2) history of hip, femur, or knee surgery or trauma, (3) and anatomic abnormalities of the proximal femur including prior slipped capital femoral epiphysis or Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease. Both femoral version and NSA were measured by a musculoskeletal fellowship trained radiologist using CT scanograms. Correlation between femoral version and NSA was determined using coefficient of determination (R²) and Pearson correlation coefficient (r) for the group as a whole and for each sex.ResultsThere was no statistical correlation between femoral version and NSA for either the entire cohort or for each sex. For the entire cohort, R² = 0.0016 and r was 0.04 (p=0.45), for females, R² = 0.0005 and r was 0.0224 (p=0.72), and for males, R² = 0.0342 and r was 0.185 (p=0.07).ConclusionThere was no correlation between femoral version and NSA. This finding is beneficial for surgeons to understand the proximal femoral anatomy. Patients with an increased femoral NSA should not be assumed to have increased femoral anteversion.Level of EvidenceLevel III, Retrospective Cohort Study     

Timing of surgery for internal fixation of intracapsular hip fractures and complications at 1 year; a 32 year clinical study of 2,366 patients at a single center

BackgroundTiming of hip fracture surgery for the internal fixation of an intracapsular fracture remains controversial and few studies to date have been able to determine the optimum time to surgery in minimizing osteonecrosis and non-union with intracapsular fractures after fixation.MethodsUsing a local hip fracture database managed by the senior author over a 32 year period, those who underwent osteosynthesis following intracapsular fractures were assessed for risk of development of non-union and osteonecrosis. Multivariate regression analysis was performed focusing on factors that were predictive of complications. Patient demographics, time from injury to surgery, fixation method, fracture pattern and complications at one year were reported. The primary outcome was whether delay to surgery contributed to risk of complications, defined as non-union or osteonecrosis. Secondary outcomes assessed the contribution of other factors to these complications.Results2,366 patients were identified with an average age of 74.7 years and 66.5% were female. 1189 (50.3%) of fractures were displaced. 481 (20.3%) had a complication at one year following fixation. 78 (3.3%) were fixed by DHS, 6 (0.3%) by cephalomedullary nail, (1257) 53.1% by cannulated screws and 1025 (43.3%) by Targon® screw. Multivariate regression revealed no significant correlation between delay to surgery and complication rates (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99, 1.01, p = 0.55). Significant variables include female sex (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.58, 2.62, p<0.0001), fracture displacement (OR 4.8, 95% CI 3.79, 6.14, p<0.0001), independent mobility (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47, 0.87, p = 0.004) and use of Targon® screws compared to parallel screws (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48, 0.76, p<0.0001).ConclusionsOur study demonstrates no relationship between timing of surgery for fixation of intracapsular fracture and complication rates. Female sex and fracture displacement increased risk of complications whereas independent mobility and use of Targon® screw device in comparison to parallel screws were protective against non-union but not avascular necrosis.     

ProDisc–C versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease: two-year outcomes of Asian prospective randomized controlled multicentre study

European Spine Journal - Our study aimed to evaluate non-inferiority of ProDisc-C to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in terms of clinical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment...     

Validity and internal consistency of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Midfoot Scale in patients with Lisfranc injury

BackgroundThe American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Scale is an extensively used outcome measure instrument for evaluating outcomes after foot and ankle surgery or trauma.MethodsIn total, 117 patients with Lisfranc injury completed the AOFAS Midfoot Scale and the Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) instruments. Internal consistency (correlation between different items), floor and ceiling values, convergent validity, item threshold distribution, and the coverage (item difficulty) of the AOFAS Midfoot scale were tested.ResultsAOFAS Midfoot Scale had high convergent validity and acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha >0.70). The ceiling effect was confirmed. The person-item distribution indicated that the scale had a lack of coverage and targeting in our sample.ConclusionsOur data suggests that the AOFAS Midfoot Scale has acceptable validity and internal consistency. However, due to the lack of coverage and targeting, it should not be the primary outcome measure to be used to evaluate the outcomes after Lisfranc injury in the future studies.