-
Medicine Dec 2017This meta-analysis aims to determine whether hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and perioperative hyperglycemia are associated with the increased risk of periprosthetic joint... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This meta-analysis aims to determine whether hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and perioperative hyperglycemia are associated with the increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection following total knee and hip arthroplasty.
METHODS
A systematic search is performed in Medline (1966-October 2017), PubMed (1966-October 2017), Embase (1980-October 2017), ScienceDirect (1985-October 2017), and the Cochrane Library. Only high-quality studies are selected. A meta-analysis is performed using Stata 11.0 software.
RESULTS
Six retrospective studies including 26,901 patients meet the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis indicates that there are significant differences between groups in terms of perioperative random blood glucose level [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 2.365, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.802-2.929, P = .000] and perioperative hemoglobin A1c level (WMD = 3.266, 95% CI: 2.858-3.674, P = .000). No significant difference is found regarding body mass index (BMI) condition between groups (WMD = 0.027, 95% CI: -0.487 to 0.541, P = .919).
CONCLUSION
The present meta-analysis shows that high HbA1c and perioperative hyperglycemia are associated with a higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection following total joint arthroplasty. Screening of HbA1c and perioperative blood glucose is therefore an effective method to predict deep infection.
Topics: Arthritis, Infectious; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hyperglycemia; Perioperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Predictive Value of Tests; Prosthesis-Related Infections
PubMed: 29390415
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008805 -
International Orthopaedics Oct 2004It has been stated in the literature that a bipolar hemiarthroplasty has a lower risk of dislocation compared to a unipolar hemiarthroplasty. As this statement has not... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
It has been stated in the literature that a bipolar hemiarthroplasty has a lower risk of dislocation compared to a unipolar hemiarthroplasty. As this statement has not been substantiated we undertook a systematic review of the literature of published articles from the last 40 years. In addition we used our own database of hip fractures. One hundred and thirty-three published articles were included in the review to give a total of 23,107 cases. The overall dislocation rate for all types of hemiarthroplasty was 791/23,107 (3.4%). An increased risk of dislocation was associated with a posterior surgical approach and the use of a cemented prosthesis. After adjustment for surgical approach and the use of cement there was no difference in risk of dislocation between unipolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasties. There was an increased risk of open reduction for a bipolar hemiarthroplasty.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Confidence Intervals; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Hip Dislocation; Hip Fractures; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Male; Odds Ratio; Probability; Prosthesis Design; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Risk Assessment; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 15316673
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-004-0572-z -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Dec 2022Early and accurate detection of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after hip and/or knee arthroplasty remains challenging. This systematic review and meta-analysis of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Early and accurate detection of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after hip and/or knee arthroplasty remains challenging. This systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of serum and synovial fluid interleukin (IL)-6 in detecting PJI.
METHODS
We searched 3 databases for studies through December 31, 2021, using medical sub-headings terms and keywords. Studies reported sensitivity and specificity of serum and synovial fluid IL-6 in detecting PJI were considered. We calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of serum and synovial fluid IL-6.
RESULTS
Thirty studies were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, DOR, and AUC of serum IL-6 in detecting PJI were 0.76 (0.69-0.81), 0.88 (0.82-0.92), 6.2 (4.3-9.0), 0.28 (0.22-0.35), 22 (14-36), and 0.88 (0.85-0.91), respectively. However, synovial fluid IL-6 achieved a pooled sensitivity of 0.87 (0.75-0.93), specificity of 0.90 (0.85-0.93), positive and negative likelihood ratio of 8.5 (5.3-13.6) and 0.15 (0.08-0.29), DOR of 57 (21-156), and AUC of 0.94 (0.92-0.96), which were higher than serum IL-6.
CONCLUSIONS
Synovial fluid IL-6 test may be a promising test for PJI after hip and/or knee arthroplasty. However, considering the limited volume of synovial fluid and invasive acquisition of synovial fluid IL-6, serum IL-6 test may be also considered.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Biomarkers; Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Interleukin-6; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Sensitivity and Specificity; Synovial Fluid
PubMed: 36566223
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03458-x -
PloS One 2015The two-stage revision strategy has been claimed as being the "gold standard" for treating prosthetic joint infection. The one-stage revision strategy remains an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The two-stage revision strategy has been claimed as being the "gold standard" for treating prosthetic joint infection. The one-stage revision strategy remains an attractive alternative option; however, its effectiveness in comparison to the two-stage strategy remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision strategies in treating prosthetic hip infection, using re-infection as an outcome.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, manual search of bibliographies to March 2015, and email contact with investigators.
STUDY SELECTION
Cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) conducted in generally unselected patients with prosthetic hip infection treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and with re-infection outcomes reported within two years of revision. No clinical trials were identified.
REVIEW METHODS
Data were extracted by two independent investigators and a consensus was reached with involvement of a third. Rates of re-infection from 38 one-stage studies (2,536 participants) and 60 two-stage studies (3,288 participants) were aggregated using random-effect models after arcsine transformation, and were grouped by study and population level characteristics.
RESULTS
In one-stage studies, the rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 8.2% (6.0-10.8). The corresponding re-infection rate after two-stage revision was 7.9% (6.2-9.7). Re-infection rates remained generally similar when grouped by several study and population level characteristics. There was no strong evidence of publication bias among contributing studies.
CONCLUSION
Evidence from aggregate published data suggest similar re-infection rates after one- or two-stage revision among unselected patients. More detailed analyses under a broader range of circumstances and exploration of other sources of heterogeneity will require collaborative pooling of individual participant data.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015016559.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Recurrence; Reoperation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26407003
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139166 -
Acta Orthopaedica Oct 2009Many studies have suggested that navigation-based implantation can improve cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA). We conducted a systematic review and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Many studies have suggested that navigation-based implantation can improve cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compile the best available evidence, and to overcome potential shortcomings because of small sample sizes in individual studies.
METHODS
The search strategy covered the major medical databases from January 1976 through August 2007, as well as various publishers' databases. The internal validity of individual studies was evaluated independently by 3 reviewers. We used random-effects modeling to obtain mean differences in cup angulation and relative risk (RR) of cup positioning outside Lewinnek's safe zone.
RESULTS
Of 363 citations originally identified, 5 trials of moderate methodology enrolling a total of 400 patients were included in the analysis. Mean cup inclination and anteversion were not statistically significantly different between the conventional groups and the navigated groups. Navigation reduced the variability in cup positioning and the risk of placing the acetabular component beyond the safe zone (RR = 0.21, CI: 0.13-0.32).
INTERPRETATION
Based on the current literature, navigation is a reliable tool to optimize cup placement, and to minimize outliers. However, long-term outcomes and cost utility analyses are needed before conclusive statements can be drawn about the value of routine navigation in THA.
Topics: Acetabulum; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 19916685
DOI: 10.3109/17453670903350073 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Aug 2023Our aim was to determine the best operative procedure in human participants with a displaced or non-displaced femoral neck fracture comparing cannulated screw (CS)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Cannulated screws versus dynamic hip screw versus hemiarthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty in patients with displaced and non-displaced femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of 5703 patients.
BACKGROUND
Our aim was to determine the best operative procedure in human participants with a displaced or non-displaced femoral neck fracture comparing cannulated screw (CS) fixation, dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation, hemiarthroplasty (HA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in terms of surgical and functional outcomes, reoperation and postoperative complications.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Clinical trials, CINAHL, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs up to 31 July 2022. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed to assess the comparative effects of the four operative procedures, using fixed-effects and random-effects models. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were estimated for binary variables.
RESULTS
A total of 33 RCTs with 5703 patients were included in our network meta-analysis. CS fixation was best in terms of operation time (CS: MD = - 57.70, 95% CI - 72.78; - 42.62; DHS: MD = - 53.56, 95% CI - 76.17; - 30.95; HA: MD = - 20.90, 95% CI - 30.65; - 11.15; THA: MD = 1.00 reference) and intraoperative blood loss (CS: MD = - 3.67, 95% CI - 4.44; - 2.90; DHS: MD = - 3.20, 95% CI - 4.97; - 1.43; HA: MD = - 1.20, 95% CI - 1.73; - 0.67; THA: MD = 1.00 reference). In life quality and functional outcome, measured at different time points with EQ-5D and the Harris Hip Score (HHS), THA ranked first and HA second (e.g. EQ-5D 2 years postoperatively: CS: MD = - 0.20, 95% CI - 0.29; - 0.11; HA: MD = - 0.09, 95% CI - 0.17; - 0.02; THA: MD = 1.00 reference; HHS 2 years postoperatively: CS: MD = - 5.50, 95% CI - 9.98; - 1.03; DHS: MD = - 8.93, 95% CI - 15.08; - 2.78; HA: MD = - 3.65, 95% CI - 6.74; - 0.57; THA: MD = 1.00 reference). CS fixation had the highest reoperation risk, followed by DHS fixation, HA, and THA (CS: OR = 9.98, 95% CI 4.60; 21.63; DHS: OR = 5.07, 95% CI 2.15; 11.96; HA: OR = 1.60, 95% CI 0.89; 2.89; THA: OR = 1.00 reference).
CONCLUSION
In our cohort of patients with displaced and non-displaced femoral neck fractures, HHS, EQ-5D, and reoperation risk showed an advantage of THA and HA compared with CS and DHS fixation. Based on these findings, we recommend that hip arthroplasty should be preferred and internal fixation of femoral neck fractures should only be considered in individual cases.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I
a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO on 10 August 2022 (CRD42022350293).
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Hemiarthroplasty; Network Meta-Analysis; Femoral Neck Fractures; Bone Screws; Fracture Fixation, Internal
PubMed: 37626370
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04114-8 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders May 2010Both minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and computer-assisted surgery (CAS) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have gained popularity in recent years. We conducted a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Both minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and computer-assisted surgery (CAS) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have gained popularity in recent years. We conducted a qualitative and systematic review to assess the effectiveness of MIS, CAS and computer-assisted MIS for THA.
METHODS
An extensive computerised literature search of PubMed, Medline, Embase and OVIDSP was conducted. Both randomised clinical trials and controlled clinical trials on the effectiveness of MIS, CAS and computer-assisted MIS for THA were included. Methodological quality was independently assessed by two reviewers. Effect estimates were calculated and a best-evidence synthesis was performed.
RESULTS
Four high-quality and 14 medium-quality studies with MIS THA as study contrast, and three high-quality and four medium-quality studies with CAS THA as study contrast were included. No studies with computer-assisted MIS for THA as study contrast were identified. Strong evidence was found for a decrease in operative time and intraoperative blood loss for MIS THA, with no difference in complication rates and risk for acetabular outliers. Strong evidence exists that there is no difference in physical functioning, measured either by questionnaires or by gait analysis. Moderate evidence was found for a shorter length of hospital stay after MIS THA. Conflicting evidence was found for a positive effect of MIS THA on pain in the early postoperative period, but that effect diminished after three months postoperatively. Strong evidence was found for an increase in operative time for CAS THA, and limited evidence was found for a decrease in intraoperative blood loss. Furthermore, strong evidence was found for no difference in complication rates, as well as for a significantly lower risk for acetabular outliers.
CONCLUSIONS
The results indicate that MIS THA is a safe surgical procedure, without increases in operative time, blood loss, operative complication rates and component malposition rates. However, the beneficial effect of MIS THA on functional recovery has to be proven. The results also indicate that CAS THA, though resulting in an increase in operative time, may have a positive effect on operative blood loss and operative complication rates. More importantly, the use of CAS results in better positioning of acetabular component of the prosthesis.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Humans; Intraoperative Period; Length of Stay; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Postoperative Complications; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 20470443
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-92 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Feb 2016The best surgical modality for treating chronic periprosthetic shoulder infections has not been established, with a lack of randomised comparative studies. This... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Does exchange arthroplasty of an infected shoulder prosthesis provide better eradication rate and better functional outcome, compared to a permanent spacer or resection arthroplasty? a systematic review.
BACKGROUND
The best surgical modality for treating chronic periprosthetic shoulder infections has not been established, with a lack of randomised comparative studies. This systematic review compares the infection eradication rate and functional outcomes after single- or two-stage shoulder exchange arthroplasty, to permanent spacer implant or resection arthroplasty.
METHODS
Full-text papers and those with an abstract in English published from January 2000 to June 2014, identified through international databases, such as EMBASE and PubMed, were reviewed. Those reporting the success rate of infection eradication after a single-stage exchange, two-stage exchange, resection arthroplasty or permanent spacer implant, with a minimum follow-up of 6 months and sample size of 5 patients were included.
RESULTS
Eight original articles reporting the results after resection arthroplasty (n = 83), 6 on single-stage exchange (n = 75), 13 on two-stage exchange (n = 142) and 8 papers on permanent spacer (n = 68) were included. The average infection eradication rate was 86.7 % at a mean follow-up of 39.8 months (SD 20.8) after resection arthroplasty, 94.7 % at 46.8 months (SD 17.6) after a single-stage exchange, 90.8 % at 37.9 months (SD 12.8) after two-stage exchange, and 95.6 % at 31.0 months (SD 9.8) following a permanent spacer implant. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.650). Regarding functional outcome, patients treated with single-stage exchange had statistically significant better postoperative Constant scores (mean 51, SD 13) than patients undergoing a two-stage exchange (mean 44, SD 9), resection arthroplasty (mean 32, SD 7) or a permanent spacer implant (mean 31, SD 9) (p = 0.029). However, when considering studies comparing pre- and post-operative Constant scores, the difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review failed to demonstrate a clear difference in infection eradication and functional improvement between all four treatment modalities for established periprosthetic shoulder infection. The relatively low number of patients and the methodological limitations of the studies available point out the need for well designed multi-center trials to further assess the best treatment option of peri-prosthetic shoulder infection.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement; Biomechanical Phenomena; Device Removal; Humans; Joint Prosthesis; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Recovery of Function; Reoperation; Risk Factors; Shoulder Joint; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26832360
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-0901-6 -
Acta Orthopaedica Apr 2012In a previous radiostereometric (RSA) trial the uncoated, uncemented, Interax tibial components showed excessive migration within 2 years compared to HA-coated and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
In a previous radiostereometric (RSA) trial the uncoated, uncemented, Interax tibial components showed excessive migration within 2 years compared to HA-coated and cemented tibial components. It was predicted that this type of fixation would have a high failure rate. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate whether this RSA prediction was correct.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the revision rate for aseptic loosening of the uncoated and cemented Interax tibial components.
RESULTS
3 studies were included, involving 349 Interax total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) for the comparison of uncoated and cemented fixation. There were 30 revisions: 27 uncoated and 3 cemented components. There was a 3-times higher revision rate for the uncoated Interax components than that for cemented Interax components (OR = 3; 95% CI: 1.4-7.2).
INTERPRETATION
This meta-analysis confirms the prediction of a previous RSA trial. The uncoated Interax components showed the highest migration and turned out to have the highest revision rate for aseptic loosening. RSA appears to enable efficient detection of an inferior design as early as 2 years postoperatively in a small group of patients.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Female; Humans; Knee Prosthesis; Male; Predictive Value of Tests; Prosthesis Failure; Radiostereometric Analysis; Reoperation
PubMed: 22530953
DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2012.672092 -
The Bone & Joint Journal Feb 2017There are two techniques widely used to determine the rotational alignment of the components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA); gap balancing (GB) and measured resection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
There are two techniques widely used to determine the rotational alignment of the components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA); gap balancing (GB) and measured resection (MR). Which technique is the best remains controversial. We aimed to investigate this in a systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In accordance with the methods of Cochrane, databases were searched for all randomised controlled trials in the literature between January 1986 and June 2015 comparing radiographic and clinical outcomes between the use of these two tecniques. Meta-analysis involved the use of the Revman5.3 software provided by Cochrane collaboration.
RESULTS
A total of 1464 papers were initially identified, and after the application of rigourous inclusion and exclusion critera, eight were included in the study. In total they inolved 980 TKAs. The meta-analysis showed that GB techniques resulted in statistically significant improvements in the restoration of mechanical and rotational alignment and mean Knee Society Scores and Knee Society Function scores two years post-operatively, but resulted in greater elevation of the position of the joint line. There is no significant difference in the other radiographic data.
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that GB may provide better radiographic and clinical outcomes than MR when used to determine mechanical rotation in TKAs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:151-8.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Bone Malalignment; Humans; Knee Joint; Knee Prosthesis; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Rotation; Surgery, Computer-Assisted
PubMed: 28148655
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B2.BJJ-2016-0042.R2