Patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) are known to be at increased risk of postoperative complications, but it is unclear whether MetS is also associated with complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Here, we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis linking MetS to postoperative complications in THA and TKA. The PubMed, OVID, and ScienceDirect databases were comprehensively searched and studies were selected and analyzed according to the guidelines of the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE). We assessed the methodological quality of each study using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and we evaluated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Data were extracted and meta-analyzed or qualitatively synthesized for several outcomes.Aims
Methods
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major potential complication following orthopaedic surgery. Subcutaneously administered enoxaparin has been used as the benchmark to reduce the incidence of VTE. However, concerns have been raised regarding the long-term administration of enoxaparin and its possible negative effects on bone healing and bone density with an increase of the risk of osteoporotic fractures. New oral anticoagulants such as rivaroxaban have recently been introduced, however, there is a lack of information regarding how these drugs affect bone metabolism and post-operative bone healing. We measured the migration and proliferation capacity of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) under enoxaparin or rivaroxaban treatment for three consecutive weeks, and evaluated effects on MSC mRNA expression of markers for stress and osteogenic differentiation.Objectives
Methods
The National Institute for Health and Clinical
Excellence (NICE) has thus far relied on historical data and predominantly
industry-sponsored trials to provide evidence for venous thromboembolic
(VTE) prophylaxis in joint replacement patients. We argue that the
NICE guidelines may be reliant on assumptions that are in need of
revision. Following the publication of large scale, independent
observational studies showing little difference between low-molecular-weight
heparins and aspirin, and recent changes to the guidance provided
by other international bodies, should NICE reconsider their recommendations? Cite this article:
