To compare the incidence of Bone Cement Implantation Syndrome (BCIS), perioperative thromboembolic events and mortality in patients with a femoral neck fracture (FNF) treated with a hybrid total hip arthroplasty (THA) without intraoperative unfractioned heparin (UFH) (control) versus a group of patients who received intraoperative UFH before femoral cementation. We retrospectively reviewed 273 patients who underwent hybrid THA due to a FNF between 2015 and 2020. We compared a group of 139 patients without intraoperative administration of UFH (group A) with 134 patients who underwent THA with intraoperative administration of 10 UI/kg UFH (group B). UFH indication was dependent on surgeon´s preference. We assessed the advent of BCIS and 30-day thromboembolic events, as well as 90-day and 1-year mortality. BCIS was observed in 51 cases (18%), defined as Grade 1 (O2% < 94% or fall in systolic blood pressure of 20% to 40%) in 37 cases (13%) and Grade 2 (O2% < 88% or fall in systolic blood pressure of > 40%) in 14 cases (5%). Forty-seven BCIS (35%) were observed in the group that received UFH and 4 BCIS (3%) in the control group (p <0.001). Multivariate regression model showed that intraoperative UFH (OR=18, CI95% 6–52) and consumption of oral anticoagulants (OR=3.3, CI95% 1–10) had an increased risk of developing BCIS. Five patients developed a pulmonary embolism in the UFH group while 2 patients presented this complication in the non UFH group (p=0.231). Mortality was 1% for both groups at 90 days PO (p= 0.98), 2% at 1 year for group A and 3% for group B (p =0.38). BCIS in our series was 18%. We found a paradoxically 17-fold significant increase of BCIS with the use of UFH. Heparin did not prevent BCIS, thromboembolic events and mortality in this group of patients

Considerable debate exists regarding which agent(s) should be preferred for venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemical prophylaxis following joint replacement. We assessed the practice of surgeons regarding VTE chemical prophylaxis for primary THR and TKR, pre and post issuing of updated NICE guidance in 2018. A survey, circulated through the British Hip Society and regional trainee networks/collaboratives, was completed by 306 UK surgeons at 187 units. VTE chemical prophylaxis prescribing patterns for surgeons carrying out primary THR (n=258) and TKR (n=253) in low-risk patients were assessed post publication of 2018 NICE recommendations. Prescribing patterns before and after the NICE publication were subsequently explored. Questions were also asked about surgeon equipoise for participation in future RCTs. Following the new guidance, 34% (n=87) used low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) alone, 33% (n=85) aspirin (commonly preceded by LMWH), and 31% (n=81) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs: with/without preceding LMWH) for THR. For TKR, 42% (n=105) used aspirin (usually monotherapy), 31% (n=78) LMWH alone, and 27% (n=68) DOAC (with/without preceding LMWH). NICE guidance changed the practice of 34% of hip and 41% of knee surgeons, with significantly increased use of aspirin preceded by LMWH for THR (before=25% vs. after=73%;p<0.001), and aspirin for TKR (before=18% vs. after=84%;p<0.001). Significantly more regimens were NICE guidance compliant after the 2018 update for THR (before=85.7% vs. after=92.6%;p=0.011) and TKR (before=87.0% vs. after=98.8%;p<0.001). Support from surgeons for future RCTs was dependent on the clinical question, ranging from 48% participation in trials (effectiveness of aspirin vs. a DOAC) to 79% (effectiveness of 14 days LMWH vs. 28 days LMWH). Over one-third of surveyed surgeons changed their VTE chemical prophylaxis in response to 2018 NICE recommendations, with more THR and TKR surgeons now compliant with latest NICE guidance. The major change in practice was an increased use of aspirin for VTE chemical prophylaxis. Furthermore, there is an appetite amongst UK surgeons for participating in future RCTs, with a trial comparing standard versus extended duration LMWH likely feasible in current practice

Background. Few studies have compared aspirin with DOACs (direct oral anticoagulants = direct thrombin inhibitors and factor Xa inhibitors) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following total hip and knee replacement (THR and TKR). We assessed the efficacy and safety of aspirin compared with DOACs for VTE prophylaxis following THR and TKR using the world's largest joint replacement registry. Methods. We studied the National Joint Registry linked to English hospital inpatient episodes for 218,650 THR and TKR patients. Patients receiving aspirin were matched separately to (1) direct thrombin inhibitors, and (2) factor Xa inhibitors using propensity scores. Outcomes assessed at 90 days included VTE, length of stay, and adverse events. Results. Following THR, the risk of VTE was significantly lower in patients receiving direct thrombin inhibitors (0.44%; odds ratio (OR)=0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.55–0.87, p=0.002) and factor Xa inhibitors (0.37%; OR=0.63, CI=0.47–0.85, p=0.003) compared with aspirin (0.63%). Following THR, direct thrombin inhibitors (coefficient=−0.37, CI=−0.43 to −0.31, p<0.001) and factor Xa inhibitors (coefficient=−0.80, CI=−0.87 to −0.74, p<0.001) reduced length of stay compared with aspirin. Similar findings for both outcomes were observed following TKR. Compared with aspirin, DOACs did not increase the risk of short-term revision surgery; reoperation; major haemorrhage; wound disruption; surgical site infection; and mortality. Conclusions. Following THR and TKR, the risk of VTE was lower in patients receiving DOACs compared with aspirin. DOACs were associated with a reduced length of stay, and DOACs did not increase the risk of further surgery, wound problems, bleeding complications, or mortality compared with aspirin

Introduction. Many pharmacologic agents have been used for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after elective total hip arthroplasty (THA). Rivaroxaban was the first novel oral anticoagulant approved for THA patients, but its actual efficacy and safety in clinical practice, beyond randomized trials, is unknown. Materials and Methods. This is a retrospective study, using the Truven Health MarketScan database, of anticoagulation medication prescriptions after elective THA, in both commercially insured (CI) and Medicare supplement insured (MS) patients, from 2010 to 2015. After exclusions, there were 83,179 CI and 50,534 MS patients available for analysis. There were 12,876 new users of warfarin (W) and 10,892 new users of rivaroxaban (R) in CI patients, and 7,416 new users of W and 4,739 new users of R in MS patients. We asked the following questions: (1) What were the trends and predictive factors for anticoagulant use after elective THA? (2) What was the actual clinical efficacy: frequency of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and frequency of adverse events within 90 days with the two most commonly used oral agents, rivaroxaban and warfarin, from June 2011 to September 2015? Data was analyzed for each anticoagulant by odds ratios using logistic regression models with stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting. Results. There was a change in use of anticoagulants after R approval. Use of W decreased from approximately 50% each in 2010 in both insurance cohorts to 10% in CI patients and 30% in MS patients in 4th quarter 2015. The use of R increased from 0 to 33% in both cohorts from 2011 to 2015. In the multivariate analysis, in CI patients, females had lower odds of getting R, and patients in Western region had higher odds of getting R; in MS patients, increasing age had reduced odds of getting rivaroxiban, but Western region and surgery in 2015 had higher odds. Patients with capitated insurance plans and renal impairment had lower odds of R initiation, but a history of cardiovascular disease or hypertension had higher odds. In 90 days after THA, patients given R had significantly lower odds ratio of both DVT and PE in both CI patients (DVT: 1.54 with W, 0.54 with R; PE: 2.12 with W, 0.73 with R) and MS patients (DVT: 3.01 W, 1.73 R; PE: 4.09 W, 1.88 R). With logistic regression analysis, users of W had significantly higher odds ratio of both DVT (CI 2.63 and MS 1.78) and PE (CI 2.60 and MS 2.09) than R. There was no significant difference in rates of bleeding between W and R, but W had higher odds ratio than R of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in both CI (1.574) and MS (1.790) cohorts. Conclusions. There has been an increase in VTE prophylaxis with R, and a decrease in both W and LMWH use after elective THA over four years. Patient factors, insurance type, and comorbidities were associated with this change. In actual clinical efficacy, R had lower odds ratio of both DVT and PE than W, and bleeding risks were similar. The association of W with an increased odds ratio of PJI compared to R requires further study

Aims

This study assessed the impact of COVID-19 on hip and distal femur fracture patient outcomes across three successive UK lockdown periods over one year.

Aims

We studied the safety and efficacy of multimodal thromboprophylaxis in patients with a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) within the first 120 postoperative days, and the mortality during the first year. Multimodal prophylaxis includes discontinuation of procoagulant medications, VTE risk stratification, regional anaesthesia, an intravenous bolus of unfractionated heparin prior to femoral preparation, rapid mobilization, the use of pneumatic compression devices, and chemoprophylaxis tailored to the patient’s risk of VTE.

Aims

Failure of irrigation and debridement (I&D) for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is influenced by numerous host, surgical, and pathogen-related factors. We aimed to develop and validate a practical, easy-to-use tool based on machine learning that may accurately predict outcome following I&D surgery taking into account the influence of numerous factors.

Aims

To analyse the effectiveness of debridement and implant retention (DAIR) in patients with hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and the relationship to patient characteristics. The outcome was evaluated in hips with confirmed PJI and a follow-up of not less than two years.

There is currently limited information available on the benefits and risks of extended thromboprophylaxis after hip fracture surgery. SAVE-HIP3 was a randomised, double-blind study conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended thromboprophylaxis with the ultra-low molecular-weight heparin semuloparin compared with placebo in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. After a seven- to ten-day open-label run-in phase with semuloparin (20 mg once daily subcutaneously, initiated post-operatively), patients were randomised to once-daily semuloparin (20 mg subcutaneously) or placebo for 19 to 23 additional days. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of any venous thromboembolism (VTE; any deep-vein thrombosis and non-fatal pulmonary embolism) or all-cause death until day 24 of the double-blind period. Safety parameters included major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding, laboratory data, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Extended thromboprophylaxis with semuloparin demonstrated a relative risk reduction of 79% in the rate of any VTE or all-cause death compared with placebo (3.9% vs 18.6%, respectively; odds ratio 0.18 (95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.45), p < 0.001). Two patients in the semuloparin group and none in the placebo group experienced clinically relevant bleeding. TEAE rates were similar in both groups. In conclusion, the SAVE-HIP3 study results demonstrate that patients undergoing hip fracture surgery benefit from extended thromboprophylaxis.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:459–66.