Aim. Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality and economic burden. Management of spinal SSI is becoming more challenging especially in instrumented cases, but is not well recognized as high risk procedure. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of procedure type comparing SSI risk with arthroplasties among all orthopaedic procedures. Method. Using prospectively collected data of consecutive samples in multi-center orthopedic SSI surveillance, we explored the differences in SSI rates within 30 days after surgery by procedure types. Patients who underwent surgery of single site between November 2013 and May 2016 were enrolled. SSI was our primary outcome. Urinary tract infection (UTI), and respiratory tract infection (RTI) were also evaluated. The definition of SSI was based on the CDC definition with slight modifications. All patients were followed for 30 days postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were done, and variables were carefully selected for adjustments. Results. In total 8,907 single site surgeries were analyzed. There were four major procedure types, fracture repair 31%, arthroplasty 30%, spinal surgery without instrumentation 14.7% and spinal instrumentation surgery 13%. Patient backgrounds were male 41.4%, diabetes 13.5%, rheumatoid arthritis 3.8 %, present smoker 13.4%, mean BMI 23+4, and operative time 144+92 minutes. Cefazolin was administered in more than 98% of all cases, and were administered appropriately before surgery. SSI occurred in 102 cases (1.2%), and the SSI rates were 2.5% in spinal instrumentation surgery and 0.6% in arthroplasty. After adjustment with several clinically relevant variables such as age, sex, diabetes and ASA, spinal instrumentation surgery was the only procedure which remained significant with adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 3.3 (1.8–6.2, P<0.01) compared with arthroplasties. The risk remained stable after adding further clinically relevant variables (aOR of 2.2 to 3.3). The risk was not significant for spinal surgery without instrumentation (aOR, 1.8; 0.9–3.5, P=0.10). Moreover, the risk of spinal instrumentation surgery was highest for UTI (aOR, 4.7; 2.9–7.6), P<0.01) and RTI (aOR, 3.7; 1.6–8.9), P<0.01) among all procedures. Conclusions. From our study, spinal instrumentation surgery was the only procedure to be significant after multivariate analysis, and the risk for SSI remained 2.2 to 3.3 fold higher compared with arthroplasties. The risk was also highest for several other major healthcare-associated infections. Considering the disastrous consequences, more interests and improvements in total perioperative care are needed for this procedure

Aims

During the COVID-19 pandemic, drilling has been classified as an aerosol-generating procedure. However, there is limited evidence on the effects of bone drilling on splatter generation. Our aim was to quantify the effect of drilling on splatter generation within the orthopaedic operative setting.

Aims. This study aimed to investigate the risk of postoperative complications in COVID-19-positive patients undergoing common orthopaedic procedures. Methods. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme (NSQIP) database, patients who underwent common orthopaedic surgery procedures from 1 January to 31 December 2021 were extracted. Patient preoperative COVID-19 status, demographics, comorbidities, type of surgery, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Propensity score matching was conducted between COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. Multivariable regression was then performed to identify both patient and provider risk factors independently associated with the occurrence of 30-day postoperative adverse events. Results. Of 194,121 included patients, 740 (0.38%) were identified to be COVID-19-positive. Comparison of comorbidities demonstrated that COVID-19-positive patients had higher rates of diabetes, heart failure, and pulmonary disease. After propensity matching and controlling for all preoperative variables, multivariable analysis found that COVID-19-positive patients were at increased risk of several postoperative complications, including: any adverse event, major adverse event, minor adverse event, death, venous thromboembolism, and pneumonia. COVID-19-positive patients undergoing hip/knee arthroplasty and trauma surgery were at increased risk of 30-day adverse events. Conclusion. COVID-19-positive patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery had increased odds of many 30-day postoperative complications, with hip/knee arthroplasty and trauma surgery being the most high-risk procedures. These data reinforce prior literature demonstrating increased risk of venous thromboembolic events in the acute postoperative period. Clinicians caring for patients undergoing orthopaedic procedures should be mindful of these increased risks, and attempt to improve patient care during the ongoing global pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):704–712

Aims. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest level of evidence used to inform patient care. However, it has been suggested that the quality of randomization in RCTs in orthopaedic surgery may be low. This study aims to describe the quality of randomization in trials included in systematic reviews in orthopaedic surgery. Methods. Systematic reviews of RCTs testing orthopaedic procedures published in 2022 were extracted from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A random sample of 100 systematic reviews was selected, and all included RCTs were retrieved. To be eligible for inclusion, systematic reviews must have tested an orthopaedic procedure as the primary intervention, included at least one study identified as a RCT, been published in 2022 in English, and included human clinical trials. The Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 Tool was used to assess random sequence generation as ‘adequate’, ‘inadequate’, or ‘no information’; we then calculated the proportion of trials in each category. We also collected data to test the association between these categories and characteristics of the RCTs and systematic reviews. Results. We included 917 unique RCTs. We found that 374 RCTs (40.8%) reported adequate sequence generation, 61 (6.7%) were inadequate, 410 (44.7%) lacked information, and 72 (7.9%) were observational studies incorrectly included as RCTs within the systematic review. Publication year, an author with statistical or epidemiological qualifications, and journal impact factor were each associated with adequate randomization. We found that 45 systematic reviews (45%) included at least one inadequately randomized RCT or an observational study incorrectly treated as a RCT. Conclusion. There is evidence of a lack of random allocation in RCTs included in systematic reviews in orthopaedic surgery. The conduct of RCTs and systematic reviews should be improved to minimize the risk of bias from inadequate randomization in RCTs and mislabelling of non-randomized studies as RCTs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(12):1072–1080

Aims. The use of fluoroscopy in orthopaedic surgery creates risk of radiation exposure to surgeons. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) can help mitigate this. The primary aim of this study was to assess if current radiation protection in orthopaedic trauma is safe. The secondary aims were to describe normative data of radiation exposure during common orthopaedic procedures, evaluate ways to improve any deficits in protection, and validate the use of electronic personal dosimeters (EPDs) in assessing radiation dose in orthopaedic surgery. Methods. Radiation exposure to surgeons during common orthopaedic trauma operations was prospectively assessed using EPDs and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Normative data for each operation type were calculated and compared to recommended guidelines. Results. Current PPE appears to mitigate more than 90% of ionizing radiation in orthopaedic fluoroscopic procedures. There is a higher exposure to the inner thigh during seated procedures. EPDs provided results for individual procedures. Conclusion. PPE currently used by surgeons in orthopaedic trauma theatre adequately reduces radiation exposure to below recommended levels. Normative data per trauma case show specific anatomical areas of higher exposure, which may benefit from enhanced radiation protection. EPDs can be used to assess real-time radiation exposure in orthopaedic surgery. There may be a role in future medical wearables for orthopaedic surgeons. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(11):907–912

Aims. Orthopaedic infection is a potentially serious complication of elective and emergency trauma and orthopaedic procedures, with a high associated burden of morbidity and cost. Optimization of vitamin D levels has been postulated to be beneficial in the prevention of orthopaedic infection. This study explores the role of vitamin D in orthopaedic infection through a systematic review of available evidence. Methods. A comprehensive search was conducted on databases including Medline and Embase, as well as grey literature such as Google Scholar and The World Health Organization Database. Pooled analysis with weighted means was undertaken. Results. Pooled analysis of four studies including 651 patients found the mean 25(OH)D level to be 50.7 nmol/l with a mean incidence of infection of 70%. There was a paucity of literature exploring prophylactic 25(OH)D supplementation on reducing orthopaedic infection, however, there was evidence of association between low 25(OH)D levels and increased incidence of orthopaedic infection. Conclusion. The results indicate a significant proportion of orthopaedic patients have low 25(OH]D levels, as well as an association between low 25(OH)D levels and orthopaedic infection, but more randomized controlled trials need to be conducted to establish the benefit of prophylactic supplementation and the optimum regimen by dose and time. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):721–727

Aims. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are common orthopaedic procedures requiring postoperative radiographs to confirm implant positioning and identify complications. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based image analysis has the potential to automate this postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate how AI is being used in the analysis of radiographs following THA and TKA, and how accurate these tools are. Methods. The Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed libraries were systematically searched to identify relevant articles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O’Malley framework were followed. Study quality was assessed using a modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies tool. AI performance was reported using either the area under the curve (AUC) or accuracy. Results. Of the 455 studies identified, only 12 were suitable for inclusion. Nine reported implant identification and three described predicting risk of implant failure. Of the 12, three studies compared AI performance with orthopaedic surgeons. AI-based implant identification achieved AUC 0.992 to 1, and most algorithms reported an accuracy > 90%, using 550 to 320,000 training radiographs. AI prediction of dislocation risk post-THA, determined after five-year follow-up, was satisfactory (AUC 76.67; 8,500 training radiographs). Diagnosis of hip implant loosening was good (accuracy 88.3%; 420 training radiographs) and measurement of postoperative acetabular angles was comparable to humans (mean absolute difference 1.35° to 1.39°). However, 11 of the 12 studies had several methodological limitations introducing a high risk of bias. None of the studies were externally validated. Conclusion. These studies show that AI is promising. While it already has the ability to analyze images with significant precision, there is currently insufficient high-level evidence to support its widespread clinical use. Further research to design robust studies that follow standard reporting guidelines should be encouraged to develop AI models that could be easily translated into real-world conditions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):929–937

Aims. There is little published on the outcomes after restarting elective orthopaedic procedures following cessation of surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, the reported perioperative mortality in patients who acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection while undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery was 18% to 20%. The aim of this study is to report the surgical outcomes, complications, and risk of developing COVID-19 in 2,316 consecutive patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgery in the latter part of 2020 and comparing it to the same, pre-pandemic, period in 2019. Methods. A retrospective service evaluation of patients who underwent elective surgical procedures between 16 June 2020 and 12 December 2020 was undertaken. The number and type of cases, demographic details, American society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, BMI, 30-day readmission rates, mortality, and complications at one- and six-week intervals were obtained and compared with patients who underwent surgery during the same six-month period in 2019. Results. A total of 2,316 patients underwent surgery in 2020 compared to 2,552 in the same period in 2019. There were no statistical differences in sex distribution, BMI, or ASA grade. The 30-day readmission rate and six-week validated complication rates were significantly lower for the 2020 patients compared to those in 2019 (p < 0.05). No deaths were reported at 30 days in the 2020 group as opposed to three in the 2019 group (p < 0.05). In 2020 one patient developed COVID-19 symptoms five days following foot and ankle surgery. This was possibly due to a family contact immediately following discharge from hospital, and the patient subsequently made a full recovery. Conclusion. Elective surgery was safely resumed following the cessation of operating during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Strict adherence to protocols resulted in 2,316 elective surgical procedures being performed with lower complications, readmissions, and mortality compared to 2019. Furthermore, only one patient developed COVID-19 with no evidence that this was a direct result of undergoing surgery. Level of evidence: III. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(1):42–53

The subject of noise in the operating theatre was recognized as early as 1972 and has been compared to noise levels on a busy highway. While noise-induced hearing loss in orthopaedic surgery specifically has been recognized as early as the 1990s, it remains poorly studied. As a result, there has been renewed focus in this occupational hazard. Noise level is typically measured in decibels (dB), whereas noise adjusted for human perception uses A-weighted sound levels and is expressed in dBA. Mean operating theatre noise levels range between 51 and 75 dBA, with peak levels between 80 and 119 dBA. The greatest sources of noise emanate from powered surgical instruments, which can exceed levels as high as 140 dBA. Newer technology, such as robotic-assisted systems, contribute a potential new source of noise. This article is a narrative review of the deleterious effects of prolonged noise exposure, including noise-induced hearing loss in the operating theatre team and the patient, intraoperative miscommunication, and increased cognitive load and stress, all of which impact the surgical team’s overall performance. Interventions to mitigate the effects of noise exposure include the use of quieter surgical equipment, the implementation of sound-absorbing personal protective equipment, or changes in communication protocols. Future research endeavours should use advanced research methods and embrace technological innovations to proactively mitigate the effects of operating theatre noise.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1039–1043.

Aims

Orthopaedic surgery uses many varied instruments with high-speed, high-impact, thermal energy and sometimes heavy instruments, all of which potentially result in aerosolization of contaminated blood, tissue, and bone, raising concerns for clinicians’ health. This study quantifies the aerosol exposure by measuring the number and size distribution of the particles reaching the lead surgeon during key orthopaedic operations.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(6):590–592.

Aims

Prophylactic antibiotic regimens for elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasty vary widely across hospitals and trusts in the UK. This study aimed to identify antibiotic prophylaxis regimens currently in use for elective primary arthroplasty across the UK, establish variations in antibiotic prophylaxis regimens and their impact on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the first-year post-index procedure, and evaluate adherence to current international consensus guidance.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(12):890–892.

Aims

To determine whether obesity and malnutrition have a synergistic effect on outcomes from skeletal trauma or elective orthopaedic surgery.

Aims

Sarcopenia is characterized by a generalized progressive loss of skeletal muscle mass, strength, and physical performance. This systematic review primarily evaluated the effects of sarcopenia on postoperative functional recovery and mortality in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery, and secondarily assessed the methods used to diagnose and define sarcopenia in the orthopaedic literature.

Aims

The aim of this study was to surveil whether the standard operating procedure created for the NHS Golden Jubilee sufficiently managed COVID-19 risk to allow safe resumption of elective orthopaedic surgery.

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) and osteosynthesis-associated infections (OSIs) present significant challenges in trauma and orthopaedic surgery, substantially impacting patient morbidity, mortality, and economic burden. This concern is heightened in patients with pre-existing comorbidities, such as diabetes mellitus, which are not always modifiable at presentation. A novel intraoperative strategy to prevent these infections is the use of Defensive Antibacterial Coating (DAC), a bio-absorbable antibiotic-containing hydrogel applied to implant surfaces at implantation, acting as a physical barrier to prevent infection. The purpose of this study is to assess the use of a commercially available hydrogel (DAC), highlighting its characteristics that make it suitable for managing PJIs and OSIs in orthopaedics and traumatology. Twenty-five patients who underwent complex orthopaedic procedures with intraoperative application of DAC between March 2022 and April 2023 at a single hospital site were included. Post-operative assessment encompassed clinical, laboratory, and radiographic examinations. In this study, 25 patients were included, with a mean age of 70 ± 14.77 years and an average ASA grade of 2.46 ± 0.78. The cohort presented an average Charleston Comorbidity score of 5.45 ± 2.24. The procedures included 8 periprosthetic fractures, 8 foot and ankle surgeries, 5 upper limb surgeries, and 4 elective hip and knee surgeries. Follow-up assessments at 6 weeks and 6 months revealed no evidence of PJI or OSI in any patients, nor were any treatments for PJI or OSI required during the interim period. DAC demonstrated efficacy in preventing infections in high-risk patients undergoing complex orthopaedic procedures. Our findings warrant further investigation into the use of DAC in complex hosts with randomized control trials

Abstract. Introduction. The NHS generates 4–5% of the nation's total carbon emissions and over 500,000 tonnes of waste annually. Up to one-third of waste from orthopaedic procedures are recyclable, with large joint arthroplasties producing more than other subspecialties. However, there is limited evidence demonstrating the principles of sustainability and its benefits within orthopaedic surgery. This study aimed to analyse the environmental impact and sustainable initiatives undertaken within orthopaedic surgery. Methodology. A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. The systematic search was conducted through EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed libraries. Results. Four studies analysed waste management in primary total knee replacements (TKRs) during the perioperative period. The most prevalent environmental issue was waste management. A total of 33 TKRs were observed across the studies. The mean waste generated per TKR was 13.1kg (range 11.6-15.1kg), with up to 69.9% being hazardous waste. The number of waste streams reported ranged from two to six. This study has further demonstrated that TKRs generated the highest amount of waste per procedure compared to other orthopaedic subspecialties. Three studies reported recycling waste, with up to 43% of total waste from TKRs being potentially recyclable material. Conclusion. Primary TKRs one of the largest contributors of waste generated by orthopaedic procedures during the perioperative period. Environmental sustainability in orthopaedic surgery is a growing area of interest with a wide potential for meaningful change. Further research is needed to study the cumulative carbon footprint of primary TKRs and long-term benefits of environmentally sustainable changes