Unconstrained metacarpophalangeal joint arthroplasties: a systematic review.

AIMS: We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of unconstrained metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) arthroplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We initially identified 1305 studies, and 406 were found to be duplicates. After exclusion criteria were applied, seven studies were included. Outcomes extracted included pre- and post-operative pain visual analogue scores, range of movement (ROM), strength of pinch and grip, satisfaction and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Clinical and radiological complications were recorded. The results are presented in three groups based on the design of the arthroplasty and the aetiology (pyrocarbon-osteoarthritis (pyro-OA), pyrocarbon-inflammatory arthritis (pyro-IA), metal-on-polyethylene (MoP)). RESULTS: Results show that pyrocarbon implants provide an 85% reduction in pain, 144% increase of pinch grip and 13° improvements in ROM for both OA and IA combined. Patients receiving MoP arthroplasties had a reduction in pinch strength. Satisfaction rates were 91% and 92% for pyrocarbon-OA and pyrocarbon-IA groups, respectively. There were nine failures in 87 joints (10.3%) over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years (1.0 to 14.3) for pyro-OA. There were 18 failures in 149 joints (12.1%) over a mean period of 6.6 years (1.0 to 16.0) for pyro-IA. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the limited presentation of data. CONCLUSION: We would recommend prospective data collection for small joint arthroplasties of the hand consisting of PROMs that would allow clinicians to come to stronger conclusions about the impact on function of replacing the MCPJs. A national joint registry may be the best way to achieve this. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:100-6.

A review of current surgical practice in the operative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: Does the PROFHER trial demonstrate a need for change?

OBJECTIVES: The PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation (PROFHER) trial has recently demonstrated that surgery is non-superior to non-operative treatment in the management of displaced proximal humeral fractures. The objective of this study was to assess current surgical practice in the context of the PROFHER trial in terms of patient demographics, injury characteristics and the nature of the surgical treatment. METHODS: A total of ten consecutive patients undergoing surgery for the treatment of a proximal humeral fracture from each of 11 United Kingdom hospitals were retrospectively identified over a 15 month period between January 2014 and March 2015. Data gathered for the 110 patients included patient demographics, injury characteristics, mode of surgical fixation, the grade of operating surgeon and the cost of the surgical implants. RESULTS: A majority of the patients were female (66%, 73 of 110). The mean patient age was 62 years (range 18 to 89). A majority of patients met the inclusion criteria for the PROFHER trial (75%, 83 of 110). Plate fixation was the most common mode of surgery (68%, 75 patients), followed by intramedullary fixation (12%, 13 patients), reverse shoulder arthroplasty (10%, 11 patients) and hemiarthroplasty (7%, eight patients). The consultant was either the primary operating surgeon or supervising the operating surgeon in a large majority of cases (91%, 100 patients). Implant costs for plate fixation were significantly less than both hemiarthroplasty (p < 0.05) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (p < 0.0001). Implant costs for intramedullary fixation were significantly less than plate fixation (p < 0.01), hemiarthroplasty (p < 0.0001) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown that the majority of a representative sample of patients currently undergoing surgical treatment for a proximal humeral fracture in these United Kingdom centres met the inclusion criteria for the PROFHER trial and that a proportion of these patients may, therefore, have been effectively managed non-operatively.Cite this article: Mr B. J. F. Dean. A review of current surgical practice in the operative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: Does the PROFHER trial demonstrate a need for change? Bone Joint Res 2016;5:178-184. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.55.2000596.

Trends in orthopaedic antimicrobial prophylaxis in the UK between 2005 and 2011.

INTRODUCTION: Antimicrobial prophylaxis remains the most powerful tool used to reduce infection rates in orthopaedics but the choice of antibiotic is complex. The aim of this study was to examine trends in antimicrobial prophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery involving the insertion of metalwork between 2005 and 2011. METHODS: Two questionnaires (one in 2008 and one in 2011) were sent to all National Health Service trusts in the UK using the Freedom of Information Act. RESULTS: In total, 87% of trusts that perform orthopaedic surgery responded. The use of cefuroxime more than halved between 2005 and 2011 from 80% to 36% and 78% to 26% in elective surgery and trauma surgery respectively. Combination therapy with flucloxacillin and gentamicin rose from 1% to 32% in elective and 1% to 34% in trauma surgery. Other increasingly popular regimes include teicoplanin and gentamicin (1% to 10% in elective, 1% to 6% in trauma) and co-amoxiclav (3% to 8% in elective, 4% to 14% in trauma). The majority of changes occurred between 2008 and 2010. Over half (56%) of the trusts stated that Clostridium difficile was the main reason for changing regimes. CONCLUSIONS: In 2008 a systematic review involving 11,343 participants failed to show a difference in surgical site infections when comparing different antimicrobial prophylaxis regimes in orthopaedic surgery. Concerns over C difficile and methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus have influenced antimicrobial regimes in both trauma and elective surgery. Teicoplanin would be an appropriate choice for antimicrobial prophylaxis in both trauma and elective units but this is not reflected in its current level of popularity.