-
Asian Journal of Surgery Oct 2021Progressive resistance training (PRT) is one of the most commonly used exercise methods after joint replacement, while its effectiveness and safety are still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Progressive resistance training (PRT) is one of the most commonly used exercise methods after joint replacement, while its effectiveness and safety are still controversial. Therefore, it's vital to investigate the effect of PRT on muscle strength and functional capacity early postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Relevant studies were identified via a search of Medline, Web of science and Cochrane Library from 2002 to 12 May 2020. Fifteen of 704 studies which comprised 6 THAs and 8 TKAs, involving 1021 adult patients were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the two groups after TKA in the 6-min walk test (6-WMT) within 1 month (95% CI = -0.41, 1.53), within 3 months (95% CI = -0.27, 0.76), within 12 months (95% CI = -0.29, 0.66); climb performance in seconds (s) (SCP), leg extension power, timed up and go test in seconds (s) (TUG) within 1 month (95% CI = -1.75, 0.77), within 3 months (95% CI = -0.48, 0.33), within 12 months (95% CI = -0.44, 0.35), sit to stand, number of repetitions in 30s (ST). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events (95% CI = -0.01, 0.10). Similarly, two groups were also no obvious distinction after THA in the 6-WMT, SCP, Leg extension power, ST. PRT early after THA or TKA did not differ significantly from SR in terms of functional capacity, muscle strength recovery and incidence of adverse events. PRT is one of the options for rapid rehabilitation after joint replacement.
Topics: Adult; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Humans; Postural Balance; Resistance Training; Time and Motion Studies
PubMed: 33715964
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2021.02.007 -
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology,... Aug 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the accuracy of component positioning, alignment and balancing techniques employed, patient-reported... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the accuracy of component positioning, alignment and balancing techniques employed, patient-reported outcomes, and complications of robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) with manual TKA (mTKA) and the associated learning curve. Searches of PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar were performed in October 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Search terms included "robotic", "knee" and "arthroplasty". The criteria for inclusion were published clinical research articles reporting the learning curve for RATKA and those comparing the component position accuracy, alignment and balancing techniques, functional outcomes, or complications with mTKA. There were 198 articles identified, following full text screening, 16 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria and reported the learning curve of rTKA (n=5), component positioning accuracy (n=6), alignment and balancing techniques (n=7), functional outcomes (n=7), or complications (n=5). Two studies reported the learning curve using CUSUM analysis to establish an inflexion point for proficiency which ranged from 7 to 11 cases and there was no learning curve for component positioning accuracy. The meta-analysis showed a significantly lower difference between planned component position and implanted component position, and the spread was narrower for RATKA compared with the mTKA group (Femur coronal: mean 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.55, p<0.00001; Tibia coronal: mean 1.56, 95% CI 1.32-1.81, p<0.00001). Three studies reported using different alignment and balancing techniques between mTKA and RATKA, two studies used the same for both group and two studies did not state the methods used in their RATKA groups. RATKA resulted in better Knee Society Score compared to mTKA in the short-to-mid-term follow up (95%CI [- 1.23, - 0.51], p=0.004). There was no difference in arthrofibrosis, superficial and deep infection, wound dehiscence, or overall complication rates. RATKA demonstrated improved accuracy of component positioning and patient-reported outcomes. The learning curve of RATKA for operating time was between 7 and 11 cases. Future well-powered studies on RATKAs should report on the knee alignment and balancing techniques utilised to enable better comparisons on which techniques maximise patient outcomes.Level of evidence III.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Humans; Knee Joint; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Tibia
PubMed: 33547914
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-021-06464-4 -
American Journal of Physical Medicine &... Jan 2023We sought to determine the comparative benefit and harm of rehabilitation interventions for patients who have undergone elective, unilateral total knee arthroplasty for...
We sought to determine the comparative benefit and harm of rehabilitation interventions for patients who have undergone elective, unilateral total knee arthroplasty for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1, 2005, through May 3, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials and adequately adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies of rehabilitation programs reporting performance-based, patient-reported, or healthcare utilization outcomes. Three researchers extracted study data and assessed risk of bias, verified by an independent researcher. The team assessed strength of evidence. Evidence from 53 studies randomized controlled trials suggests that various rehabilitation programs after total knee arthroplasty may lead to comparable improvements in pain, range of motion, and activities of daily living. Rehabilitation in the acute phase may lead to increased strength but result in similar strength when delivered in the postacute phase. No studies reported evidence of risk of harms due to rehabilitation delivered in the acute period after total knee arthroplasty; risk of harms among various postacute rehabilitation programs seems comparable. All findings were of low strength of evidence. Evaluation of rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty needs a systematic overhaul to sufficiently guide future practice or research including the use of standardized intervention components and core outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Activities of Daily Living; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 35302953
DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000002008 -
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine Jun 2021To investigate the effectiveness of modified rehabilitation programmes in comparison with standard rehabilitation programmes after total knee arthroplasty through... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effectiveness of modified rehabilitation programmes in comparison with standard rehabilitation programmes after total knee arthroplasty through randomized controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
A search was conducted in PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC) and Cochrane Library databases in December 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials were reviewed if they compared a physiotherapy exercise intervention with usual or standard physiotherapy care, or if they compared 2 types of exercise physiotherapy interventions meeting the review criteria, after total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. A total of 18 randomized controlled trials were included at the end of the screening process.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two authors independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The outcomes were knee extension, knee flexion, pain visual analogue scale, overall Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), 6-minute walking test, and Timed Up and Go test.
DATA SYNTHESIS
There was no clear pattern regarding which combination of starting time-point and duration of the rehabilitation programme after total knee arthroplasty significantly improves the clinical outcome when comparing modified rehabilitation programmes with standard programmes. Moreover, no particular modification to the modified programmes could be solely attributed to the improved clinical outcome in the 2 studies that showed significant improvement.
CONCLUSION
Modified rehabilitation programmes do not result in systematic improvement in clinical outcome over one-size-fits-all-approaches after total knee arthroplasty.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33846757
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-2827 -
American Journal of Physical Medicine &... Jan 2023We sought to determine the comparative benefits and harms of rehabilitation interventions for patients who have undergone elective, unilateral THA surgery for the...
We sought to determine the comparative benefits and harms of rehabilitation interventions for patients who have undergone elective, unilateral THA surgery for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1, 2005, through May 3, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials and adequately adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies of rehabilitation programs reporting performance-based, patient-reported, or healthcare utilization outcomes. Three researchers extracted study data and assessed risk of bias, verified by an independent researcher. Experts in rehabilitation content and complex interventions independently coded rehabilitation interventions. The team assessed strength of evidence. Large heterogeneity across evaluated rehabilitation programs limited conclusions. Evidence from 15 studies suggests that diverse rehabilitation programs may not differ in terms of risk of harm or outcomes of pain, strength, activities of daily living, or quality of life (all low strength of evidence). Evidence is insufficient for other outcomes. In conclusion, no differences in outcomes were found between different rehabilitation programs after THA. Further evidence is needed to inform decisions on what attributes of rehabilitation programs are most effective for various outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Quality of Life; Activities of Daily Living; Program Evaluation
PubMed: 35302955
DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000002007 -
Anaesthesia Aug 2021The aim of this systematic review was to develop recommendations for the management of postoperative pain after primary elective total hip arthroplasty, updating the...
The aim of this systematic review was to develop recommendations for the management of postoperative pain after primary elective total hip arthroplasty, updating the previous procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) guidelines published in 2005 and updated in July 2010. Randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses published between July 2010 and December 2019 assessing postoperative pain using analgesic, anaesthetic, surgical or other interventions were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases. Five hundred and twenty studies were initially identified, of which 108 randomised trials and 21 meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. Peri-operative interventions that improved postoperative pain include: paracetamol; cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitors; non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; and intravenous dexamethasone. In addition, peripheral nerve blocks (femoral nerve block; lumbar plexus block; fascia iliaca block), single-shot local infiltration analgesia, intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia also improved pain. Limited or inconsistent evidence was found for all other approaches evaluated. Surgical and anaesthetic techniques appear to have a minor impact on postoperative pain, and thus their choice should be based on criteria other than pain. In summary, the analgesic regimen for total hip arthroplasty should include pre-operative or intra-operative paracetamol and cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitors or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, continued postoperatively with opioids used as rescue analgesics. In addition, intra-operative intravenous dexamethasone 8-10 mg is recommended. Regional analgesic techniques such as fascia iliaca block or local infiltration analgesia are recommended, especially if there are contra-indications to basic analgesics and/or in patients with high expected postoperative pain. Epidural analgesia, femoral nerve block, lumbar plexus block and gabapentinoid administration are not recommended as the adverse effects outweigh the benefits. Although intrathecal morphine 0.1 mg can be used, the PROSPECT group emphasises the risks and side-effects associated with its use and provides evidence that adequate analgesia may be achieved with basic analgesics and regional techniques without intrathecal morphine.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Humans; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 34015859
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15498 -
JAMA Internal Medicine Mar 2020Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) receive venous thromboembolism (VTE) pharmacoprophylaxis. It is unclear which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Aspirin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Total Hip and Knee Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
IMPORTANCE
Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) receive venous thromboembolism (VTE) pharmacoprophylaxis. It is unclear which anticoagulant is preferable. Observational data suggest aspirin provides effective VTE prophylaxis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis after THR and TKR.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with no language restrictions, from inception to September 19, 2019, using MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and bibliographic searches. The computer-based searches combined terms and combinations of keywords related to the population (eg, hip replacement, knee replacement, hip arthroplasty, and knee arthroplasty), drug intervention (eg, aspirin, heparin, clexane, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin), and outcome (eg, venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding) in humans.
STUDY SELECTION
This study included RCTs assessing the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis compared with other anticoagulants in adults undergoing THR and TKR. The RCTs with a placebo control group were excluded. The searches and study selection were independently performed.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study followed PRISMA recommendations and used the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Data were screened and extracted independently by both reviewers. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) were aggregated using random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was any postoperative VTE (asymptomatic or symptomatic). Secondary outcomes were adverse events associated with therapy, including bleeding.
RESULTS
Of 437 identified articles, 13 RCTs were included (6060 participants; 3466 [57.2%] women; mean age, 63.0 years). The RR of VTE after THR and TKR was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.78-1.62) for aspirin compared with other anticoagulants. Comparable findings were observed for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.72-1.51) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.48). The risk of adverse events, including major bleeding, wound hematoma, and wound infection, was not statistically significantly different in patients receiving aspirin vs other anticoagulants. When analyzing THRs and TKRs separately, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of VTE, DVT, and PE between aspirin and other anticoagulants. Aspirin had a VTE risk not statistically significantly different from low-molecular-weight heparin (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.37-1.56) or rivaroxaban (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.56-4.12). The quality of the evidence ranged from low to high.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In terms of clinical effectiveness and safety profile, aspirin did not differ statistically significantly from other anticoagulants used for VTE prophylaxis after THR and TKR. Future trials should focus on noninferiority analysis of aspirin compared with alternative anticoagulants and cost-effectiveness.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Aspirin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 32011647
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.6108 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2022Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising rapidly. The majority of hip fractures are treated surgically. This review evaluates evidence for types of arthroplasty: hemiarthroplasties (HAs), which replace part of the hip joint; and total hip arthroplasties (THAs), which replace all of it.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of different designs, articulations, and fixation techniques of arthroplasties for treating hip fractures in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, seven other databases and one trials register in July 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different arthroplasties for treating fragility intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included THAs and HAs inserted with or without cement, and comparisons between different articulations, sizes, and types of prostheses. We excluded studies of people with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis and with hip fractures resulting from high-energy trauma.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for seven outcomes: activities of daily living, functional status, health-related quality of life, mobility (all early: within four months of surgery), early mortality and at 12 months after surgery, delirium, and unplanned return to theatre at the end of follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 58 studies (50 RCTs, 8 quasi-RCTs) with 10,654 participants with 10,662 fractures. All studies reported intracapsular fractures, except one study of extracapsular fractures. The mean age of participants in the studies ranged from 63 years to 87 years, and 71% were women. We report here the findings of three comparisons that represent the most substantial body of evidence in the review. Other comparisons were also reported, but with many fewer participants. All studies had unclear risks of bias in at least one domain and were at high risk of detection bias. We downgraded the certainty of many outcomes for imprecision, and for risks of bias where sensitivity analysis indicated that bias sometimes influenced the size or direction of the effect estimate. HA: cemented versus uncemented (17 studies, 3644 participants) There was moderate-certainty evidence of a benefit with cemented HA consistent with clinically small to large differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.34; 3 studies, 1122 participants), and reduction in the risk of mortality at 12 months (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96; 15 studies, 3727 participants). We found moderate-certainty evidence of little or no difference in performance of activities of daily living (ADL) (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.16; 4 studies, 1275 participants), and independent mobility (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14; 3 studies, 980 participants). We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in delirium (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.06; 2 studies, 800 participants), early mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.13; 12 studies, 3136 participants) or unplanned return to theatre (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; 6 studies, 2336 participants). For functional status, there was very low-certainty evidence showing no clinically important differences. The risks of most adverse events were similar. However, cemented HAs led to less periprosthetic fractures intraoperatively (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.46; 7 studies, 1669 participants) and postoperatively (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 studies, 2819 participants), but had a higher risk of pulmonary embolus (RR 3.56, 95% CI 1.26 to 10.11, 6 studies, 2499 participants). Bipolar HA versus unipolar HA (13 studies, 1499 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between bipolar and unipolar HAs in early mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.64; 4 studies, 573 participants) and 12-month mortality (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.53; 8 studies, 839 participants). We are unsure of the effect for delirium, HRQoL, and unplanned return to theatre, which all indicated little or no difference between articulation, because the certainty of the evidence was very low. No studies reported on early ADL, functional status and mobility. The overall risk of adverse events was similar. The absolute risk of dislocation was low (approximately 1.6%) and there was no evidence of any difference between treatments. THA versus HA (17 studies, 3232 participants) The difference in the risk of mortality at 12 months was consistent with clinically relevant benefits and harms (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.22; 11 studies, 2667 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in unplanned return to theatre, but this effect estimate includes clinically relevant benefits of THA (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.07, favours THA; 10 studies, 2594 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between THA and HA in delirium (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; 2 studies, 357 participants), and mobility (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.16, favours THA; 1 study, 83 participants). We are unsure of the effect for early functional status, ADL, HRQoL, and mortality, which indicated little or no difference between interventions, because the certainty of the evidence was very low. The overall risks of adverse events were similar. There was an increased risk of dislocation with THA (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.27; 12 studies, 2719 participants) and no evidence of a difference in deep infection.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For people undergoing HA for intracapsular hip fracture, it is likely that a cemented prosthesis will yield an improved global outcome, particularly in terms of HRQoL and mortality. There is no evidence to suggest a bipolar HA is superior to a unipolar prosthesis. Any benefit of THA compared with hemiarthroplasty is likely to be small and not clinically appreciable. We encourage researchers to focus on alternative implants in current clinical practice, such as dual-mobility bearings, for which there is limited available evidence.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Female; Hip Fractures; Hip Joint; Humans; Middle Aged; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35156194
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013410.pub2 -
The Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports... Nov 2022To assess whether prehabilitation influenced knee functioning before and within the first year after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery. Intervention systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To assess whether prehabilitation influenced knee functioning before and within the first year after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery. Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis. The authors searched the MEDLINE/PubMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from their inception until March 2022. The authors included peer-reviewed articles comparing preoperative, short-, mid- or long-term effects of exercise-based physical therapy before primary unilateral TKA with TKA without prehabilitation. We assessed bias using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool (ROB 2.0) and therapeutic validity using the i-CONTENT tool. Standardized mean differences (Hedges' ) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for knee functioning. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Sixteen trials (968 participants) were included; 14 qualified for meta-analysis. Low to very low certainty of evidence favored prehabilitation over no intervention for improving knee functioning before ( = 1.23; 95% CI: 0.49, 1.97) and up to 3 months after TKA (short-term: 1 day to 1 month, = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.18, 1.61; mid-term: 6 weeks to 3 months, = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.84). There were no significant between-group differences at long-term follow-up (6-12 months, = 0.07; 95% CI: -0.17, 0.30). There was low to very low certainty of evidence that prehabilitation promotes superior knee functioning before and up to 3 months after TKA, compared to TKA alone. The long-term postoperative effects were inconclusive. .
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Preoperative Exercise; Knee Joint; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Knee
PubMed: 36125444
DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2022.11160 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Sep 2019Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Anaesthetic care of patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: consensus recommendations from the International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes.
METHODS
The International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) systematic review, including randomised controlled and observational studies comparing neuraxial to general anaesthesia regarding major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, genitourinary, thromboembolic, neurological, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, from 1946 to May 17, 2018 were queried. Meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was utilised to assess evidence quality and to develop recommendations.
RESULTS
The analysis of 94 studies revealed that neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with lower odds or no difference in virtually all reported complications, except for urinary retention. Excerpt of complications for neuraxial vs general anaesthesia in hip/knee arthroplasty, respectively: mortality odds ratio (OR): 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.80/OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60-1.15; pulmonary OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.80/OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.81; acute renal failure OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81/OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65-0.82; deep venous thrombosis OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.42-0.65/OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93; infections OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.67-0.79/OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.76-0.85; and blood transfusion OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89/OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87.
CONCLUSIONS
Recommendation: primary neuraxial anaesthesia is preferred for knee arthroplasty, given several positive postoperative outcome benefits; evidence level: low, weak recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION
neuraxial anaesthesia is recommended for hip arthroplasty given associated outcome benefits; evidence level: moderate-low, strong recommendation. Based on current evidence, the consensus group recommends neuraxial over general anaesthesia for hip/knee arthroplasty.
TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42018099935.
Topics: Anesthesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Spinal; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31351590
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.05.042