The prevalence of cam hip morphology in a general population sample.

OBJECTIVE: Cam hip morphology is associated with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome and causes hip osteoarthritis (OA). We aimed to assess the prevalence of cam hip morphology in a sample representative of the general population, using a measure with a predefined diagnostic accuracy. DESIGN: Patients aged 16-65, who were admitted to a major trauma centre and received a computed tomography (CT) pelvis were retrospectively screened for eligibility. Subjects with proximal femoral, acetabular or pelvic fractures and those who were deceased were excluded. Eligible subjects were divided into 10 groups based on gender and age. 20 subjects from each group were included. Subjects' index of multiple deprivation (IMD) and ethnicity were recorded. CT imaging was assessed and alpha angles (a measure of cam morphology) measured in the anterosuperior aspect of the femoral head neck junction. An alpha angle greater than 60° was considered to represent cam morphology. This measure and technique has a predefined sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 73% to detect cam morphology associated with FAI syndrome. The prevalence of cam morphology was reported as a proportion of subjects affected with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: 200 subjects were included. The sample was broadly representative of the UK general population in terms of IMD. 155 subjects (86%) identified as white. Cam morphology was present in 47% (95% CI 42,51) of subjects. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, broadly representative of the UK general population 47% of subjects had cam hip morphology; a hip shape associated with FAI syndrome and OA.

Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing fractures in total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of data from the National Joint Registry.

AIMS: Ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings in total hip arthroplasty (THA) are commonly used, but concerns exist regarding ceramic fracture. This study aims to report the risk of revision for fracture of modern CoC bearings and identify factors that might influence this risk, using data from the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed data on 223 362 bearings from 111 681 primary CoC THAs and 182 linked revisions for bearing fracture recorded in the NJR. We used implant codes to identify ceramic bearing composition and generated Kaplan-Meier estimates for implant survivorship. Logistic regression analyses were performed for implant size and patient specific variables to determine any associated risks for revision. RESULTS: A total of 222 852 bearings (99.8%) were CeramTec Biolox products. Revisions for fracture were linked to seven of 79 442 (0.009%) Biolox Delta heads, 38 of 31 982 (0.119%) Biolox Forte heads, 101 of 80 170 (0.126%) Biolox Delta liners and 35 of 31 258 (0.112%) Biolox Forte liners. Regression analysis of implant size revealed smaller heads had significantly higher odds of fracture (chi-squared 68.0, p < 0.001). The highest fracture risk was observed in the 28 mm Biolox Forte subgroup (0.382%). There were no fractures in the 40 mm head group for either ceramic type. Liner thickness was not predictive of fracture (p = 0.67). Body mass index (BMI) was independently associated with revision for both head fractures (odds ratio (OR) 1.09 per unit increase, p = 0.031) and liner fractures (OR 1.06 per unit increase, p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: We report the largest independent study of CoC bearing fractures to date. The risk of revision for CoC bearing fracture is very low but previous studies have underestimated this risk. There is good evidence that the latest generation of ceramic has greatly reduced the odds of head fracture but not of liner fracture. Small head size and high patient BMI are associated with an increased risk of ceramic bearing fracture. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1012-19.

A pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of a femoral nerve block and periarticular infiltration for early pain relief following total knee arthroplasty.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a femoral nerve block and a periarticular infiltration in the management of early post-operative pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A pragmatic, single centre, two arm parallel group, patient blinded, randomised controlled trial was undertaken. All patients due for TKA were eligible. Exclusion criteria included contraindications to the medications involved in the study and patients with a neurological abnormality of the lower limb. Patients received either a femoral nerve block with 75 mg of 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride around the nerve, or periarticular infiltration with 150 mg of 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride, 10 mg morphine sulphate, 30 mg ketorolac trometamol and 0.25 mg of adrenaline all diluted with 0.9% saline to make a volume of 150 ml. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients were recruited and data from 230 (88%) were available for the primary analysis. Intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome measure of a visual analogue score for pain on the first post-operative day, prior to physiotherapy, was similar in both groups. The mean difference was -0.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) -5.9 to 4.5; p = 0.834). The periarticular group used less morphine in the first post-operative day compared with the femoral nerve block group (74%, 95% CI 55 to 99). The femoral nerve block group reported 39 adverse events, of which 27 were serious, in 31 patients and the periarticular group reported 51 adverse events, of which 38 were serious, in 42 patients up to six weeks post-operatively. None of the adverse events were directly attributed to either of the interventions under investigation. CONCLUSION: Periarticular infiltration is a viable and safe alternative to femoral nerve block for the early post-operative relief of pain following TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:904-11.

Protocol for a multicentre, parallel-arm, 12-month, randomised, controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery versus conservative care for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FASHIoN).

INTRODUCTION: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is a recognised cause of young adult hip pain. There has been a large increase in the number of patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery for FAI; however, a recent Cochrane review highlighted that there are no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating treatment effectiveness. We aim to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic surgery versus best conservative care for patients with FAI syndrome. METHODS: We will conduct a multicentre, pragmatic, assessor-blinded, two parallel arm, RCT comparing arthroscopic surgery to physiotherapy-led best conservative care. 24 hospitals treating NHS patients will recruit 344 patients over a 26-month recruitment period. Symptomatic adults with radiographic signs of FAI morphology who are considered suitable for arthroscopic surgery by their surgeon will be eligible. Patients will be excluded if they have radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis, previous significant hip pathology or previous shape changing surgery. Participants will be allocated in a ratio of 1:1 to receive arthroscopic surgery or conservative care. Recruitment will be monitored and supported by qualitative intervention to optimise informed consent and recruitment. The primary outcome will be pain and function assessed by the international hip outcome tool 33 (iHOT-33) measured 1-year following randomisation. Secondary outcomes include general health (short form 12), quality of life (EQ5D-5L) and patient satisfaction. The primary analysis will compare change in pain and function (iHOT-33) at 12 months between the treatment groups, on an intention-to-treat basis, presented as the mean difference between the trial groups with 95% CIs. The study is funded by the Health Technology Assessment Programme (13/103/02). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is granted by the Edgbaston Research Ethics committee (14/WM/0124). The results will be disseminated through open access peer-reviewed publications, including Health Technology Assessment, and presented at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN64081839; Pre-results.

Prevalence of cam hip shape morphology: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Cam hip shape morphology is a recognised cause of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and is associated with hip osteoarthritis. Our aim was to systematically review the available epidemiological evidence assessing the prevalence of cam hip shape morphology in the general population and any studied subgroups including subjects with and without hip pain. DESIGN: All studies that reported the prevalence of cam morphology, measured by alpha angles, in subjects aged 18 and over, irrespective of study population or presence of hip symptoms were considered for inclusion. We searched AMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL in October 2015. Two authors independently identified eligible studies and assessed risk of bias. We planned to pool data of studies considered clinically homogenous. RESULTS: Thirty studies met inclusion criteria. None of the included studies were truly population-based: three included non-representative subgroups of the general population, 19 included differing clinical populations, while eight included professional athletes. All studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity meta analysis was not possible. Across all studies, the prevalence estimates of cam morphology ranged from 5 to 75% of participants affected. We were unable to demonstrate a higher prevalence in selected subgroups such as athletes or those with hip pain. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient high quality data to determine the true prevalence of cam morphology in the general population or selected subgroups. Well-designed population-based epidemiological studies that use homogenous case definitions are required to determine the prevalence of cam morphology and its relationship to hip pain.

The feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial comparing arthroscopic hip surgery to conservative care for patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: the FASHIoN feasibility study.

To determine whether it was feasible to perform a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing arthroscopic hip surgery to conservative care in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). This study had two phases: a pre-pilot and pilot RCT. In the pre-pilot, we conducted interviews with clinicians who treated FAI and with FAI patients to determine their views about an RCT. We developed protocols for operative and conservative care. In the pilot RCT, we determined the rates of patient eligibility, recruitment and retention, to investigate the feasibility of the protocol and we established methods to assess treatment fidelity. In the pre-pilot phase, 32 clinicians were interviewed, of which 26 reported theoretical equipoise, but in example scenarios 7 failed to show clinical equipoise. Eighteen patients treated for FAI were also interviewed, the majority of whom felt that surgery and conservative care were acceptable treatments. Surgery was viewed by patients as a 'definitive solution'. Patients were motivated to participate in research but were uncomfortable about randomization. Randomization was more acceptable if the alternative was available at the end of the trial. In the pilot phase, 151 patients were assessed for eligibility. Sixty were eligible and invited to take part in the pilot RCT; 42 consented to randomization. Follow-up was 100% at 12 months. Assessments of treatment fidelity were satisfactory. An RCT to compare arthroscopic hip surgery with conservative care in patients with FAI is challenging but feasible. Recruitment has started for a full RCT.

Protocol for a single-centre randomised controlled trial of multimodal periarticular anaesthetic infiltration versus single-agent femoral nerve blockade as analgesia for total knee arthroplasty: Perioperative Analgesia for Knee Arthroplasty (PAKA).

INTRODUCTION: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery causes postoperative pain. The use of perioperative injections around the knee containing local anaesthetic, opiates and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has increased in popularity to manage pain. Theoretical advantages include reduced requirements for analgesia and earlier mobilisation. We propose a single-centre randomised controlled trial of multimodal periarticular anaesthetic infiltration versus femoral nerve anaesthetic blockade as analgesia for TKA. The aim is to determine, in patients undergoing TKA, if there is a difference in patient-reported pain scores on the visual analogue scale (VAS) prior to physiotherapy on day 1 postoperatively between treatment groups. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients undergoing a primary unilateral TKA at University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Hospitals will be assessed for eligibility. A total of 264 patients will provide 90% power to detect a difference of 12 mm on the VAS on day 1 postoperatively at the 5% level. The trial will use 1:1 randomisation, stratified by mode of anaesthetic. Primary outcome measure will be the VAS for pain prior to physiotherapy on day 1. Secondary outcome measures include VAS on day 2, total use of opiate analgesia up to 48 h, ordinal pain scores up to 40 min after surgery, independent functional knee physiotherapist assessment on days 1 and 2. Oxford knee Scores (OKS), EuroQol (EQ-5D) and Douleur Neuropathic Pain Scores (DN2) will be recorded at baseline, 6 weeks and 12 months. Adverse events will be recorded up to 12 months. Analysis will investigate differences in VAS on day 1 between the two treatment groups on an intention-to-treat basis. Tests will be two-sided and considered to provide evidence for a significant difference if p values are less than 0.05. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: NRES Committee West Midlands, 23 September 2013 (ref: 13/WM/0316). The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN 60611146 and EUDRACT Number 2013-002439-10 (protocol code number PAKA-33601-AS117013); Pre-results.