Arthroplasty has been shown to generate the most waste among all orthopaedic subspecialties, and it is estimated that hip and knee arthroplasty generate in excess of three million kg of waste annually in the UK. Infectious waste generates up to ten times more CO2 compared with recycled waste, and previous studies have shown that over 90% of waste in the infectious stream is misallocated. We assessed the effect of real-time waste segregation by an unscrubbed team member on waste generation in knee and hip arthroplasty cases, and compared this with a simple educational intervention during the ‘team brief’ at the start of the operating list across two sites. Waste was categorized into five categories: infectious, general, recycling, sharps, and linens. Each category was weighed at the end of each case using a digital weighing scale. At Site A (a tertiary orthopaedic hospital), pre-intervention data were collected for 16 total knee arthroplasy (TKA) and 15 total hip arthroplasty (THA) cases. Subsequently, for ten TKA and ten THA cases, an unscrubbed team member actively segregated waste in real-time into the correct streams. At Site B (a district general hospital), both pre- and post-intervention groups included ten TKA and ten THA cases. The intervention included reminding staff during the ‘team brief’ to segregate waste correctly.Aims
Methods
Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around the knee are challenging injuries. This study aims to describe the characteristics of knee PPFs and the impact of patient demographics, fracture types, and management modalities on in-hospital mortality. Using a multicentre study design, independent of registry data, we included adult patients sustaining a PPF around a knee arthroplasty between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Univariate, then multivariable, logistic regression analyses were performed to study the impact of patient, fracture, and treatment on mortality.Aims
Methods
Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) following hip arthroplasty are complex injuries. This study evaluates patient demographic characteristics, management, outcomes, and risk factors associated with PPF subtypes over a decade. Using a multicentre collaborative study design, independent of registry data, we identified adults from 29 centres with PPFs around the hip between January 2010 and December 2019. Radiographs were assessed for the Unified Classification System (UCS) grade. Patient and injury characteristics, management, and outcomes were compared between UCS grades. A multinomial logistic regression was performed to estimate relative risk ratios (RRR) of variables on UCS grade.Aims
Methods
The National Health Service produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste and 25 mega tonnes of CO2 annually. Operating room waste is segregated into different streams which are recycled, disposed of in landfill sites, or undergo costly and energy-intensive incineration processes. By assessing the quantity and recyclability of waste from primary hip and knee arthroplasty cases, we aim to identify strategies to reduce the carbon footprint of arthroplasty surgery. Data was collected prospectively at a tertiary orthopaedic hospital, in the theatres of six arthroplasty surgeons between April – July 2022. Fifteen primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 16 primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cases were included; revision and complex primary cases were excluded. Waste was categorised into non-hazardous waste, hazardous waste, recycling, sharps, and linens. Each waste category was weighed. Items disposed as non-hazardous waste were catalogued for a sample of 10 TKA and 10 THA cases. Recyclability of items was determined from packaging. Average total waste generated for THA and TKA were 14.46kg and 17.16kg respectively, with TKA generating significantly greater waste (p < 0.05). On average only 5.4% of waste was recycled in TKA and just 2.9% in THA cases. The mean recycled waste was significantly greater in TKA cases compared to THA, 0.93kg and 0.42kg respectively (p < 0.05). Hazardous waste represented the largest proportion of the waste streams for both TKA (69.2%) and THA (73.4%). On average TKA generated a significantly greater amount (11.87kg) compared to THA (10.61kg), p < 0.05. Non-hazardous waste made up 15.1% and 11.3% of total waste for TKA and THA respectively. In the non-hazardous waste, only two items (scrub brush packaging and sterile towel packaging) were identified as recyclable based on packaging. We estimate that annually total hip and knee arthroplasty generates over 2.7 million kg of waste in the UK. Through increased use of recyclable plastics for packaging, combined with clear labelling of items as recyclable, medical suppliers can significantly reduce the carbon footprint of arthroplasty. Our data highlight only a very small percentage of waste is recycled in total hip and knee arthroplasty cases.
During revision THR, the surgery is often difficult and compromised due to lack of patient's bone especially in the pelvis. Any extra bone in the acetabulum is expected to be of advantage to the patient and the surgeon. The aim of this study was to see if preservation of medial acetabular osteophyte in uncemented total hip replacement had any adverse effect on the prosthesis survival or patient satisfaction. Conventional acetabular preparation involves reaming down to the true floor. This not only medialises the centre of rotation of the hip but also reduces the acetabular offset. In contrast the main surgeon preserved the acetabular offset by preserving some osteophytic bone between the true floor of the acetabulum and the acetabular cup. This is achieved by reaming the acetabular cavity conservatively while achieving secure primary fixation of the prosthesis. We report the outcome of a single surgeon series of such cases. The endpoint was assessed as the need for revision of the acetabular cup. A total of 106 consecutive patients were identified who underwent uncemented THR from 2005 to 2010. The medial osteophyte was measured on immediate post-operative x-rays, from the “teardrop” to the nearest point of the acetabular cup, by 3 surgeons (one consultant and 2 registrars). The patients were contacted for a telephone interview and their clinical notes, including x-rays, were reviewed. Outcome was available for 79 patients. 74 patients were available for follow-up and 5 patients died unrelated to THR. Average follow-up was for 8.3 years (range 5.5–10.8). Average age was 62 years. The average medial osteophyte was 1.98 mm (range 0–14mm). One patient had late infection and one had dislocation. There was not a single failure of the acetabular component. The patient satisfaction was high at 8.8 out of 10. Preservation of medial osteophyte in the acetabulum whilst doing uncemented THR has the advantage of retaining the patient's own bone stock which can be of great advantage to the surgeon as well as the patient should revision THR be required in future. Our study has shown that this can be achieved without compromising the survival of the prosthesis or the patient satisfaction. This technique may increase the range of motion of the hip by reducing the risk of bony or soft tissue impingement, and also reduce the risk of dislocation. Furthermore, not recreating the native centre of rotation of the hip does not seem to have any adverse effect for the patients, who are very happy with the outcome. We recommend that whilst doing uncemented THR, the acetabulum should not be reamed to the true floor as has been the conventional teaching, but attempt should be made to preserve some medial osteophyte where possible, at the same ensuring that good primary fixation of the cup is achieved. This is to give the patient and surgeon the advantage of extra available bone should revision surgery be required in the future.
