The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period. Cite this article:
The aim of this study was to assess the influence of obesity on the clinical outcomes and survivorship ten years postoperatively in patients who underwent a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). We prospectively followed 184 patients who underwent UKA between 2003 and 2007 for a minimum of ten years. A total of 142 patients with preoperative body mass index (BMI) of < 30 kg/m2 were in the control group (32 male, 110 female) and 42 patients with BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2 were in the obese group (five male, 37 female). Pre- and postoperative range of movement (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and survivorship were analyzed.Aims
Patients and Methods
This study investigated the influence of body mass index (BMI)
on patients’ function and quality of life ten years after total
knee arthroplasty (TKA). A total of 126 patients who underwent unilateral TKA in 2006
were prospectively included in this retrospective study. They were
categorized into two groups based on BMI: < 30 kg/m2 (control)
and ≥ 30 kg/m2 (obese). Functional outcome was assessed
using the Knee Society Function Score (KSFS), Knee Society Knee
Score (KSKS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Quality of life was assessed
using the Physical (PCS) and Mental Component Scores (MCS) of the 36-Item
Short-Form Health Survey.Aims
Patients and Methods
This study investigated the influence of body mass index (BMI)
on the post-operative fall in the level of haemoglobin (Hb), length
of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day re-admission rate, functional outcome
and quality of life, two years after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A total of 7733 patients who underwent unilateral primary TKA
between 2001 and 2010 were included. The mean age was 67 years (30
to 90). There were 1421 males and 6312 females. The patients were
categorised into three groups: BMI <
25.0 kg/m2 (normal);
BMI between 25.0 and 39.9 kg/m2 (obese); and BMI ≥ 40.0
kg/m2 (morbidly obese).Aims
Patients and Methods
We prospectively followed 171 patients who underwent
bilateral unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) over a period
of two years. Of these, 124 (72.5%) underwent a simultaneous bilateral
procedure and 47 (27.5%) underwent a staged procedure. The mean
cumulative operating time and length of hospital stay were both
shorter in the simultaneous group, by 22.5 minutes (p <
0.001)
and three days (p <
0.001), respectively. The mean reduction
in haemoglobin level post-operatively was greater by 0.15 g/dl in
the simultaneous group (p = 0.023), but this did not translate into
a significant increase in the number of patients requiring blood
transfusion (p = 1.000). The mean hospital cost was lower by $8892
in the simultaneous group (p <
0.001). There was no significant
difference in the rate of complications between the groups, and
at two-year follow-up there was no difference in the outcomes between
the two groups. We conclude that simultaneous bilateral UKR can be recommended
as an appropriate treatment for patients with bilateral medial compartment
osteoarthritis of the knee. Cite this article:
