Comparative efficacy of aspirin versus direct oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following primary total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Introduction: Venous thromboembolisms (VTEs), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolisms (PE), are common after total knee (TKA) and hip arthroplasty (THA). Recent studies suggest that aspirin effectively prevents VTE following major orthopaedic surgery. This meta-analysis compares randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating aspirin versus direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for VTE prevention after primary THA and TKA. Methods: We included RCTs from 2017 to 2023 that looked at aspirin versus DOACs for VTE prophylaxis in primary THA and TKA. A search strategy was conducted which used Boolean operators and MESH terms. Primary outcomes included VTE rates, symptomatic, asymptomatic DVT and PE. Secondary outcomes were mortality and bleeding complications. Statistical analysis was performed using REVMAN software. An odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval was generated for the pooled studies. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 variable, and publication bias was evaluated with a funnel plot. Results: Seven RCTs with 3967 patients were included for analysis. Rivaroxaban 10 mg OD was compared to varying doses of aspirin (81-300 mg). There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of VTE (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.72-2.01), PE (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.39-2.61), asymptomatic DVT (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.64-3.00), suspected DVT (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.49-2.61) and major bleeding (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.55-1.27). Discussion: Aspirin is as effective as rivaroxaban for primary thromboprophylaxis post-THA and TKA, without increased incidence of complications. Further research is needed to determine the optimal dosing regimen of aspirin and its long-term efficacy in preventing VTE. Level of Evidence: Level I.

Partial body fat percentage as a predictor of fragility fractures in a large cohort: a cross-sectional study.

Objectives: BMI is a component of fracture risk calculators; however, it may be too simplistic to predict fracture risk. There is emerging evidence for the role that fat plays as a predictor of fracture. Partial body fat percentage (PBF%) may be a novel way to predict both hip and non-hip fractures. The aim of this study is to evaluate PBF% as a predictor of fragility fractures. Methods: A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted looking at PBF% as a predicter of both non-hip and hip fractures in an observational cohort. Our results were adjusted for age, biological sex, gender, smoking status, excess alcohol consumption (>3 units/day), current steroid therapy and the T-scores in both femurs. To allow for comparison, the same model was used with BMI, height and weight as the primary predictor of fracture. A subgroup analysis was conducted stratified by fracture site. A sensitivity analysis using a negative binomial regression was conducted. Results: A total of 31 447 patients were included in our analysis [mean age 64.9 years (s.d. 12.9)]. PBF% was shown to predict all non-hip fractures after adjustment [odds ratio (OR) 22.14 (95% CI 15.08, 32.50)]. Hip fractures were not predicted by our model [OR 4.19 (95% CI 0.43, 41.46)]. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated a lack of predictive capability for hip fracture but not non-hip fractures. Conclusion: PBF% may be a suitable predictor for all non-hip fractures, independent of confounding variables. More research is needed on whether it can predict hip fractures.