Factors associated with high mortality rates in geriatric hip fracture patients are frequently unmodifiable. Time to surgery, however, might be a modifiable factor of interest to optimize clinical outcomes after hip fracture surgery. This study aims to determine the influence of postponement of surgery due to non-medical reasons on clinical outcomes in acute hip fracture surgery. This observational cohort study enrolled consecutively admitted patients with a proximal femoral fracture, for which surgery was performed between 1 January 2018 and 11 January 2021 in two level II trauma teaching hospitals. Patients with medical indications to postpone surgery were excluded. A total of 1,803 patients were included, of whom 1,428 had surgery < 24 hours and 375 had surgery ≥ 24 hours after admission.Aims
Methods
Chondrosarcoma is the second most common surgically treated primary bone sarcoma. Despite a large number of scientific papers in the literature, there is still significant controversy about diagnostics, treatment of the primary tumour, subtypes, and complications. Therefore, consensus on its day-to-day treatment decisions is needed. In January 2024, the Birmingham Orthopaedic Oncology Meeting (BOOM) attempted to gain global consensus from 300 delegates from over 50 countries. The meeting focused on these critical areas and aimed to generate consensus statements based on evidence amalgamation and expert opinion from diverse geographical regions. In parallel, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in oncological reconstructions poses unique challenges due to factors such as adjuvant treatments, large exposures, and the complexity of surgery. The meeting debated two-stage revisions, antibiotic prophylaxis, managing acute PJI in patients undergoing chemotherapy, and defining the best strategies for wound management and allograft reconstruction. The objectives of the meeting extended beyond resolving immediate controversies. It sought to foster global collaboration among specialists attending the meeting, and to encourage future research projects to address unsolved dilemmas. By highlighting areas of disagreement and promoting collaborative research endeavours, this initiative aims to enhance treatment standards and potentially improve outcomes for patients globally. This paper sets out some of the controversies and questions that were debated in the meeting. Cite this article:
Although periarticular injection plays an important role in multimodal pain management following total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is no consensus on the optimal composition of the injection. In particular, it is not clear whether the addition of a corticosteroid improves the pain relief achieved nor whether it is associated with more complications than are observed without corticosteroid. The aim of this study was to quantify the safety and effectiveness of cortocosteroid use in periarticular injection during THA. We conducted a prospective, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving patients scheduled for unilateral THA. A total of 187 patients were randomly assigned to receive periarticular injection containing either a corticosteroid (CS group) or without corticosteroid (no-CS group). Other perioperative interventions were identical for all patients. The primary outcome was postoperative pain at rest during the initial 24 hours after surgery. Pain score was recorded every three hours until 24 hours using a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). The primary outcome was assessed based on the area under the curve (AUC).Aims
Methods
The number of arthroplasties being performed
increases each year. Patients undergoing an arthroplasty are at
risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and appropriate prophylaxis
has been recommended. However, the optimal protocol and the best
agent to minimise VTE under these circumstances are not known. Although
many agents may be used, there is a difference in their efficacy
and the risk of bleeding. Thus, the selection of a particular agent relies
on the balance between the desire to minimise VTE and the attempt
to reduce the risk of bleeding, with its undesirable, and occasionally
fatal, consequences. Acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) is an agent for VTE prophylaxis
following arthroplasty. Many studies have shown its efficacy in
minimising VTE under these circumstances. It is inexpensive and
well-tolerated, and its use does not require routine blood tests.
It is also a ‘milder’ agent and unlikely to result in haematoma
formation, which may increase both the risk of infection and the
need for further surgery. Aspirin is also unlikely to result in persistent
wound drainage, which has been shown to be associated with the use
of agents such as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and other
more aggressive agents. The main objective of this review was to summarise the current
evidence relating to the efficacy of aspirin as a VTE prophylaxis
following arthroplasty, and to address some of the common questions
about its use. There is convincing evidence that, taking all factors into account,
aspirin is an effective, inexpensive, and safe form of VTE following
arthroplasty in patients without a major risk factor for VTE, such
as previous VTE. Cite this article:
