Hallux valgus (HV) presents as a common forefoot deformity that causes problems with pain, mobility, footwear, and quality of life. The most common open correction used in the UK is the Scarf and Akin osteotomy, which has good clinical and radiological outcomes and high levels of patient satisfaction when used to treat a varying degrees of deformity. However, there are concerns regarding recurrence rates and long-term outcomes. Minimally invasive or percutaneous surgery (MIS) has gained popularity, offering the potential for similar clinical and radiological outcomes with reduced postoperative pain and smaller scars. Despite this, MIS techniques vary widely, hindering comparison and standardization. This review evaluates the evidence for both open Scarf and Akin osteotomy and newer-generation MIS techniques. Fourth-generation MIS emphasizes multiplanar rotational deformity correction through stable fixation. While MIS techniques show promise, their evidence mainly comprises single-surgeon case series. Comparative studies between open and MIS techniques suggest similar clinical and radiological outcomes, although MIS may offer advantages in scar length and less early postoperative pain. MIS may afford superior correction in severe deformity and lower recurrence rates due to correcting the bony deformity rather than soft-tissue correction. Recurrence remains a challenge in HV surgery, necessitating long-term follow-up and standardized outcome measures for assessment. Any comparison between the techniques requires comparative studies. Surgeons must weigh the advantages and risks of both open and MIS approaches in collaboration with patients to determine the most suitable treatment. Cite this article:
A modular femoral head–neck junction has practical
advantages in total hip replacement. Taper fretting and corrosion
have so far been an infrequent cause of revision. The role of design
and manufacturing variables continues to be debated. Over the past
decade several changes in technology and clinical practice might
result in an increase in clinically significant taper fretting and
corrosion. Those factors include an increased usage of large diameter
(36 mm) heads, reduced femoral neck and taper dimensions, greater
variability in taper assembly with smaller incision surgery, and
higher taper stresses due to increased patient weight and/or physical
activity. Additional studies are needed to determine the role of
taper assembly compared with design, manufacturing and other implant
variables. Cite this article:
High energy fractures of the pelvis are a challenging problem both in the immediate post-injury phase and later when definitive fixation is undertaken. No single management algorithm can be applied because of associated injuries and the wide variety of trauma systems that have evolved around the world. Initial management is aimed at saving life and this is most likely to be achieved with an approach that seeks to identify and treat life-threatening injuries in order of priority. Early mortality after a pelvic fracture is most commonly due to major haemorrhage or catastrophic brain injury. In this article we review the role of pelvic binders, angiographic embolisation, pelvic packing, early internal fixation and blood transfusion with regard to controlling haemorrhage. Definitive fixation seeks to prevent deformity and reduce complications. We believe this should be undertaken by specialist surgeons in a hospital resourced, equipped and staffed to manage the whole spectrum of major trauma. We describe the most common modes of internal fixation by injury type and review the factors that influence delayed mortality, adverse functional outcome, sexual dysfunction and venous thromboembolism.
Thromboprophylaxis remains a controversial subject. A vast amount of epidemiological and trial data about venous thromboembolism has been published over the past 40 years. These data have been distilled and synthesised into guidelines designed to help the practitioner translate this extensive research into ‘evidence-based’ advice. Guidelines should, in theory, benefit patient care by ensuring that every patient routinely receives the best prophylaxis; without guidelines, it is argued, patients may fail to receive treatment or be exposed to protocols which are ineffective, dangerous or expensive. Guidelines, however, have not been welcomed or applied universally. In the United States, orthopaedic surgeons have published their concerns about the thromboprophylaxis guidelines prepared by the American College of Chest Physicians. In Britain, controversy persists with many surgeons unconvinced of the risk/benefit, cost/benefit or practicality of thromboprophylaxis. The extended remit of the recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence thromboprophylaxis guidelines has been challenged. The reasons for this disquiet are addressed in this paper and particular emphasis is placed on how clinically-acceptable guidelines could be developed and applied.
