Fibroblasts Promote Inflammation and Pain via IL-1α Induction of the Monocyte Chemoattractant Chemokine (C-C Motif) Ligand 2.

Fibroblasts persist within fibrotic scar tissue and exhibit considerable phenotypic and functional plasticity. Herein, we hypothesized that scar-associated fibroblasts may be a source of stress-induced inflammatory exacerbations and pain. To test this idea, we used a human model of surgery-induced fibrosis, total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Using a combination of tissue protein expression profiling and bioinformatics, we discovered that many months after TKA, the fibrotic joint exists in a state of unresolved chronic inflammation. Moreover, the infrapatellar fat pad, a soft tissue that becomes highly fibrotic in the post-TKA joint, expresses multiple inflammatory mediators, including the monocyte chemoattractant, chemokine (C-C motif) ligand (CCL) 2, and the innate immune trigger, IL-1α. Fibroblasts isolated from the post-TKA fibrotic infrapatellar fat pad express the IL-1 receptor and on exposure to IL-1α polarize to a highly inflammatory state that enables them to stimulate the recruitment of monocytes. Blockade of fibroblast CCL2 or its transcriptional regulator NF-κB prevented IL-1α-induced monocyte recruitment. Clinical investigations discovered that levels of patient-reported pain in the post-TKA joint correlated with concentrations of CCL2 in the joint tissue, such that the chemokine is effectively a pain biomarker in the TKA patient. We propose that an IL-1α-NF-κB-CCL2 signaling pathway, operating within scar-associated fibroblasts, may be therapeutically manipulated for alleviating inflammation and pain in fibrotic joints and other tissues.

The ORthopaedic Trauma Hospital Outcomes - Patient Operative Delays (ORTHOPOD) study.

Aims: This is a multicentre, prospective assessment of a proportion of the overall orthopaedic trauma caseload of the UK. It investigates theatre capacity, cancellations, and time to surgery in a group of hospitals that is representative of the wider population. It identifies barriers to effective practice and will inform system improvements. Methods: Data capture was by collaborative approach. Patients undergoing procedures from 22 August 2022 and operated on before 31 October 2022 were included. Arm one captured weekly caseload and theatre capacity. Arm two concerned patient and injury demographics, and time to surgery for specific injury groups. Results: Data was available from 90 hospitals across 86 data access groups (70 in England, two in Wales, ten in Scotland, and four in Northern Ireland). After exclusions, 709 weeks' of data on theatre capacity and 23,138 operations were analyzed. The average number of cases per operating session was 1.73. Only 5.8% of all theatre sessions were dedicated day surgery sessions, despite 29% of general trauma patients being eligible for such pathways. In addition, 12.3% of patients experienced at least one cancellation. Delays to surgery were longest in Northern Ireland and shortest in England and Scotland. There was marked variance across all fracture types. Open fractures and fragility hip fractures, influenced by guidelines and performance renumeration, had short waits, and varied least. In all, nine hospitals had 40 or more patients waiting for surgery every week, while seven had less than five. Conclusion: There is great variability in operative demand and list provision seen in this study of 90 UK hospitals. There is marked variation in nearly all injuries apart from those associated with performance monitoring. There is no evidence of local network level coordination of care for orthopaedic trauma patients. Day case operating and pathways of care are underused and are an important area for service improvement.

ORthopaedic trauma hospital outcomes - Patient operative delays (ORTHOPOD) Study: The management of day-case orthopaedic trauma in the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: ORTHOPOD: Day Case Trauma is a multicentre prospective service evaluation of day-case trauma surgery across four countries. It is an epidemiological assessment of injury burden, patient pathways, theatre capacity, time to surgery and cancellation. It is the first evaluation of day-case trauma processes and system performance at nationwide scale. METHODS: Data was prospectively recorded through a collaborative approach. Arm one captured weekly caseload burden and operating theatre capacity. Arm two detailed patient and injury demographics, and time to surgery for specific injury groups. Patients scheduled for surgery between 22/08/22 and 16/10/22 and operated on before 31/10/22, were included. For this analysis, hand and spine injuries were excluded. RESULTS: Data was obtained from 86 Data Access Groups (70 in England, 2 in Wales, 10 in Scotland and 4 in Northern Ireland). After exclusions, 709 weeks worth of data representing 23,138 operative cases were analysed. Day-case trauma patients (DCTP) accounted for 29.1% of overall trauma burden and utilised 25.7% of general trauma list capacity. They were predominantly adults aged 18 to 59 (56.7%) with upper limb Injuries (65.7%). Across the four nations, the median number of day-case trauma lists (DCTL) available per week was 0 (IQR 1). 6 of 84 (7.1%) hospitals had at least five DCTLs per week. Rates of cancellation (13.2% day-case; 11.9% inpatient) and escalation to elective operating lists (9.1% day-case; 3.4% inpatient) were higher in DCTPs. For equivalent injuries, DCTPs waited longer for surgery. Distal radius and ankle fractures had median times to surgery within national recommendations: 3 days and 6 days respectively. Outpatient route to surgery was varied. Dominant pathways (>50% patients listed at that episode) in England and Wales were uncommon but the most frequently seen was listing patients in the emergency department, 16 of 80 hospitals (20%). CONCLUSION: There is significant mismatch in DCTP management and resource availability. There is also considerable variation in DCTP route to surgery. Suitable DCTL patients are often managed as inpatients. Improving day-case trauma services reduces the burden on general trauma lists and this study demonstrates there is considerable scope for service and pathway development and improved patient experience.

Variation of implant use in A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures : a study from the National Hip Fracture Database of England and Wales.

AIMS: Patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures represent a substantial proportion of trauma caseload, and national guidelines recommend that sliding hip screws (SHS) should be used for these injuries. Despite this, intramedullary nails (IMNs) are routinely implanted in many hospitals, at extra cost and with unproven patient outcome benefit. We have used data from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) to examine the use of SHS and IMN for A1 and A2 hip fractures at a national level, and to define the cost implications of management decisions that run counter to national guidelines. METHODS: We used the NHFD to identify all operations for fixation of trochanteric fractures in England and Wales between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021. A uniform price band from each of three hip fracture implant manufacturers was used to set cost implications alongside variation in implant use. RESULTS: We identified 18,156 A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures in 162 centres. Of these, 13,483 (74.3%) underwent SHS fixation, 2,352 (13.0%) were managed with short IMN, and 2,321 (12.8%) were managed with long IMN. Total cost of IMN added up to £1.89 million in 2021, and the clinical justification for this is unclear since rates of IMN use varied from 0% to 97% in different centres. CONCLUSION: Most trochanteric hip fractures are managed with SHS, in keeping with national guidelines. There is considerable variance between hospitals for implant choice, despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of more expensive nailing systems. This suggests either a lack of awareness of national guidelines or a choice not to follow them. We encourage provider units to reassess their practice if outwith the national norm. Funding bodies should examine implant use closely in this population to prevent resource waste at a time of considerable health austerity.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):741-745.

Evaluating outcomes following emergency laparotomy in the North of England and the impact of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit - A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Current trends suggest improvements have been made in recent years, with increased survival and shorter lengths of stay in hospital. The National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) has evaluated participating hospitals in England and Wales and their individual outcomes since 2013. This study aims to establish temporal trends for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and evaluate the influence of NELA. METHODS: Data for emergency laparotomies admitted to NHS hospitals in the Northern Deanery between 2001 and 2016 were collected, including demographics, co-morbidities, diagnoses, operations undertaken and outcomes. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital death within 30 days of admission. Cox-regression analysis was undertaken with adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: There were 2828 in-hospital deaths from 24,291 laparotomies within 30 days of admission (11.6%). Overall 30-day mortality significantly reduced during the 15-year period studied from 16.3% (2001-04), to 8.1% during 2013-16 (p < 0.001). After multivariate adjustment, laparotomies undertaken in more recent years were associated with a lower mortality risk compared to earlier years (2013-16: HR 0.73, p < 0.001). There was a significant improvement in 30-day postoperative mortality year-on-year during the NELA period (from 9.1 to 7.1%, p = 0.039). However, there was no difference in postoperative mortality for patients who underwent laparotomy during NELA (2013-16) compared with the preceding three years (both 8.1%, p = 0.526). DISCUSSION: 30 day postoperative mortality for emergency laparotomy has improved over the past 15-years, with significantly reduced mortality risk in recent years. However, it is unclear if NELA has yet had a measurable effect on 30-day post-operative mortality.

Infection prevention measures for orthopaedic departments during the COVID-2019 pandemic: a review of current evidence.

AIM: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents significant challenges to healthcare systems globally. Orthopaedic surgeons are at risk of contracting COVID-19 due to their close contact with patients in both outpatient and theatre environments. The aim of this review was to perform a literature review, including articles of other coronaviruses, to formulate guidelines for orthopaedic healthcare staff. METHODS: A search of Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, World Health Organization (WHO), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) databases was performed encompassing a variety of terms including 'coronavirus', 'covid-19', 'orthopaedic', 'personal protective environment' and 'PPE'. Online database searches identified 354 articles. Articles were included if they studied any of the other coronaviruses or if the basic science could potentially applied to COVID-19 (i.e. use of an inactivated virus with a similar diameter to COVID-19). Two reviewers independently identified and screened articles based on the titles and abstracts. 274 were subsequently excluded, with 80 full-text articles retrieved and assessed for eligibility. Of these, 66 were excluded as they compared personal protection equipment to no personal protection equipment or referred to prevention measures in the context of bacterial infections. RESULTS: There is a paucity of high quality evidence surrounding COVID-19. This review collates evidence from previous coronavirus outbreaks to put forward recommendations for orthopaedic surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic. The key findings have been summarized and interpreted for application to the orthopaedic operative setting. CONCLUSION: For COVID-19 positive patients, minimum suggested PPE includes N95 respirator, goggles, face shield, gown, double gloves, and surgical balaclava.Space suits not advised.Be trained in the correct technique of donning and doffing PPE.Use negative pressure theatres if available.Minimize aerosolization and its effects (smoke evacuation and no pulse lavage).Minimize further unnecessary patient-staff contact (dissolvable sutures, clear dressings, split casts).