Cycling-related orthopaedic fractures admitted to the Major Trauma Centre in the cycling capital of the UK.

INTRODUCTION: The popularity of cycling in the United Kingdom is increasing, with a further rise likely due to recent government cycling promotion schemes. This study aims to characterise fractures sustained due to cycling-related collisions in patients presenting to a Major Trauma Centre, in the region with the highest cycling rates in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of cycling injuries presenting to our centre between January 2012 and December 2020 was performed using a prospectively collected electronic database. Comparison of fracture characteristics was made according to patient age and mechanism of injury (collision with a motorised vehicle versus collision with a non-motorised object.). RESULTS: Of the 737 patients who suffered a cycling-related injury, 292 (39.6%) suffered at least 1 fracture to the appendicular skeleton. Overall, fractures were most commonly seen in those over 50 years of age. Upper limb fractures were more common than lower limb fractures. Fractures sustained during motorised injuries were more likely to require surgical intervention than those sustained during non-motorised collisions. CONCLUSION: This study provides valuable information regarding the nature, epidemiology and treatment of fractures sustained following cycling-related accidents, adding to the paucity of similar literature in the field. Given the likely increase in future cycling uptake, our results are important to clinicians treating patients with cycling-related injuries and policymakers designing safety interventions.

Dynamic hip screw fixation of subtrochanteric femoral fractures.

INTRODUCTION: A subtrochanteric proximal femur fracture occurs in the 5 cm of bone immediately distal to the lesser trochanter. UK national guidelines advise that adults with subtrochanteric fractures should be treated with an intramedullary nail (IMN). This study aims to compare peri-operative outcome measures of patients with subtrochanteric fractures treated with either an IMN or a dynamic hip screw (DHS) construct. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed subtrochanteric fractures presenting at our institution over 4.5 years (October 2014-May 2019), classifying them into two treatment groups; IMN and DHS. These groups were compared on outcome measures including surgical time, blood loss, radiation dose area product (DAP), length of stay, re-operation rate and mortality. RESULTS: During the time period studied, 86 patients presented with a subtrochanteric fracture of the femur; with 74 patients (86%) receiving an IMN and 12 (14%) receiving a DHS. The comparative outcome measures reaching statistical significance were blood loss and radiation DAP. The DHS group showed a significantly lower mean blood loss of 776 ml compared to 1029 ml in the IMN group. Also, the DHS group showed a significantly lower mean DAP of 150.30 mGy cm2 compared to 288.86 mGy cm2 in the IMN group. CONCLUSION: Although UK national guidelines recommend treating all subtrochanteric fractures with an IMN; the outcome measures assessed in our study did not show use of an IMN to be superior to a DHS. The DHS group showed a lower estimated blood loss and a reduced DAP. This, along with the reduced financial cost associated with a DHS, may support the use of DHS over IMN for certain subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. There may not be a single favourable implant for the treatment of subtrochanteric fractures as a whole; instead different subtypes of fracture may be amenable to a number of fixation devices. Choice of implant should be determined locally and based on existing and future clinical and health economic research.

Knee Fix or Replace Trial (KFORT): a randomized controlled feasibility study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, appropriately powered, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing internal fracture fixation and distal femoral replacement (DFR) for distal femoral fractures in older patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven centres recruited patients into the study. Patients were eligible if they were greater than 65 years of age with a distal femoral fracture, and if the surgeon felt that they were suitable for either form of treatment. Outcome measures included the patients' willingness to participate, clinicians' willingness to recruit, rates of loss to follow-up, the ability to capture data, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation, and the main determinants of cost. The primary clinical outcome measure was the EuroQol five-dimensional index (EQ-5D) at six months following injury. RESULTS: Of 36 patients who met the inclusion criteria, five declined to participate and eight were not recruited, leaving 23 patients to be randomized. One patient withdrew before surgery. Of the remaining patients, five (23%) withdrew during the follow-up period and six (26%) died. A 100% response rate was achieved for the EQ-5D at each follow-up point, excluding one missing datapoint at baseline. In the DFR group, the mean cost of the implant outweighed the mean cost of many other items, including theatre time, length of stay, and readmissions. For a powered RCT, a total sample size of 1400 would be required with 234 centres recruiting over three years. At six months, the EQ-5D utility index was lower in the DFR group. CONCLUSION: This study found that running a full-scale trial in this country would not be feasible. However, it may be feasible to undertake an international multicentre trial, and our findings provide some guidance about the power of such a study, the numbers required, and some challenges that should be anticipated and addressed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1408-1415.

Revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement.

Recent reports suggest good outcome results following unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). However, a number of authors have commented on the problem of osseous defects requiring technically difficult revision surgery. We reviewed clinical outcomes following revision total knee replacement (TKR) for failed UKR and analysed the reasons for failure and the technical aspects of the revision surgery. Between 2001 and 2010 our institute performed 132 UKR's out of which 33 required revision to TKR during a period 6 years. Demographics, details and indications for primary and revision surgery, the revised prosthesis including augments, technical difficulties and complications were noted. Patient outcome assessment was based on the Oxford knee score (OKS). Survival analysis for the UKR prosthesis was calculated using Kaplan-Meier Survival curves. Reasons for revision included aseptic loosening, persistent pain, dislocated meniscus, mal-alignment and other compartment osteoarthritis. Median time to revision was 19 months (range 2-159). Using revision as the end-point the survival proportion at 5-years was 69%. 18 revisions required additional intra-operative constructs including stemmed implants, wedge augmentation or bone graft. The mean 1 year post-operative OKS was 29 compared to 39 for primary TKR during the same period (p<0.001). Aseptic loosening was the commonest mode of failure. UKR survivorship at a non-specialist institute is considerably lower than at originating centres. Two thirds of the revisions were technically difficult and required additional constructs. The clinical outcome after revision surgery was inferior to that of primary TKR. The role of UKR needs to be more clearly defined.

Anterior approaches to the hip for the treatment of femoro-acetabular impingement: a cadaveric study.

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) may be a cause of early osteoarthritis of the hip. The aim of surgical treatment is to improve the head-neck offset in the presence of a cam lesion and to perform acetabular rim resection when pincer impingement is evident, either by open surgery or arthroscopically. We investigated two mini anterior approaches to the hip joint based on the Heuter and direct anterior approach to assess their potential for treating FAI. The two approaches were employed in 20 hips in 10 human cadaveric specimens. The area of femoral head and the portion of the acetabular rim that could be exposed was documented. We found that the two approaches were easy and reproducible. Both allowed adequate exposure to the femoral head. The area of acetabular rim accessible varied significantly according to the approach (p<0.05). We also found that the position of the anterior inferior iliac spine in relation to the acetabular rim also affected the area of acetabular rim exposed (p<0.05). In summary, cam and pincer impingement of the hip can be treated by either the direct anterior or by the Heuter approach. The choice of approach is dictated by the site of the acetabular pincer lesion identified on pre-operative imaging, with a more medial exposure possible through the direct anterior approach and more anterolateral exposure via the Heuter approach.