Search

Objectives Intra-articular steroid injection is commonly used to treat base of thumb osteoarthritis (BTOA), despite a lack of large-scale data on safety and effectiveness. We estimate the incidence of serious complications and further procedures following BTOA injection, including the risk of post-operative serious surgical site infection for subsequent operative intervention. Methods Hospital Episode Statistics data linked to mortality records from 1 April 1998 to 31 March 2017 were used to identify all BTOA injections undertaken in adults in the National Health Service secondary care in England. Patients were followed up longitudinally until death or 31 March 2017. A multivariable regression with a Fine and Gray model adjusting for the competing risk of mortality in addition to age, sex and socioeconomic deprivation was used to identify factors associated with progression to further procedure. Secondary outcomes included serious complications after injection and subsequent surgical site infection. Results A total of 19 120 primary injections were performed during the 19-year period in 18 356 patients. Of these 76.5% were female; mean age 62 years (s.d. 10.6); 50.48% underwent further procedure; 22.40% underwent surgery. Median time to further intervention was 412 days (IQR 110–1945). Female sex was associated with increased risk of proceeding to surgery. Serious complication rate following injection was 0.04% (0.01–0.08) within 90 days. Of those proceeding to surgery 0.16% (0.06–0.34) presented with a wound infection within 30 days and 90 days, compared with an overall post-operative wound infection rate of 0.03% (0.02–0.05). Conclusions Very low rates of serious complications were identified following BTOA injections performed in secondary care; only one in five patients proceeded to subsequent surgery. Clinical trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03573765

Progressive hand interphalangeal joint (IPJ) osteoarthritis is associated with pain, reduced function and impaired quality of life. However, the evidence surrounding risk factors for IPJ osteoarthritis progression is unclear. Identifying risk factors for IPJ osteoarthritis progression may inform preventative strategies and early interventions to improve long-term outcomes for individuals at risk of IPJ osteoarthritis progression. The objectives of the study were to describe methods used to measure the progression of IPJ osteoarthritis and identify risk factors for IPJ osteoarthritis progression. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 19th February 2020 (PROSPERO CRD42019121034). Eligible studies assessed potential risk factor/s associated with IPJ osteoarthritis progression. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified QUIPS Tool, and a best evidence synthesis was performed. Of eight eligible studies, all measured osteoarthritis progression radiographically, and none considered symptoms. Eighteen potential risk factors were assessed. Diabetes (adjusted mean difference between 2.06 and 7.78), and larger finger epiphyseal index in males (regression coefficient β = 0.202) and females (β = 0.325) were identified as risk factors (limited evidence). Older age in men and women showed mixed results; 13 variables were not risk factors (all limited evidence). Patients with diabetes and larger finger epiphyseal index might be at higher risk of radiographic IPJ osteoarthritis progression, though evidence is limited and studies are biased. Studies assessing symptomatic IPJ osteoarthritis progression are lacking. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00296-020-04687-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Aim Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) produces benefits to patients by reducing the length of hospital stay and morbidity. Its effect on nursing and physiotherapy workload has been studied, but the demand upon radiology is unclear. We aimed to determine radiology use to understand possible hidden expenditure not included in existing ERAS cost-effectiveness analyses. Method Two-hundred and sixty-five patients from a prospective multidimensional ERAS database were retrospectively assessed for postoperative radiology use. All had undergone colorectal surgery within an established ERAS programme from 2008 to 2009, with all data prospectively recorded. Laparoscopy was offered for all primary colon and rectal resections. All adverse events, including gut dysfunction, surgical site infection and reoperation, were assessed. All radiology within 30 days of surgery was recorded. Results Radiology data were absent in 12 patients, leaving 253 for analysis. Postoperative radiology was used in 71 (28%) patients, and 41 (16%) had CT of the abdomen and pelvis (A/P) within 30 days of surgery. In 33 (13%) patients this was required during the primary admission, including 30% of patients with any postoperative adverse event. Nine (27%; 3.6% of the whole cohort) of the 33 patients required reoperation. No patient required interventional radiology. The median time to CT (A/P) during primary admission was 5 (interquartile range, 3–8) days. Eight (3%) patients had CT (A/P) after readmission with one reoperation. Forty (16%) patients underwent plain radiology (chest or abdominal) and six (2%) had abdominal ultrasound. Using general estimates of CT and plain radiology total costs, these data suggest an overall radiology cost of over £22 000, amounting to a radiology cost of £90 per ERAS patient. Conclusion Postoperative radiology is required in a significant proportion of ERAS patients, potentially reflecting a low threshold to investigate in the presence of an adverse event. Very few require subsequent intervention. Radiology costs incurred with ERAS should be considered in future economic analyses.

Aim Early identification of patients experiencing postoperative complications is imperative for successful management. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a nonspecific marker of inflammation used in many specialties to monitor patient condition. The role of CRP measurement early in the elective postoperative colorectal patient is unclear, particularly in the context of enhanced recovery (ERAS). Methods Five hundred and thirty-three consecutive patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery between October 2008 and October 2010 within an established ERAS programme were studied. Patients were separated into a development group of 265 patients and a validation group of 268 patients by chronological order. CRP and white cell count were added to a prospectively maintained ERAS database. The primary outcome of the study was all adverse events (including infective complications, postoperative organ dysfunction and prolonged length of stay) during the initial hospital admission. Significant predictors for adverse events on univariate analysis were submitted to multivariate regression analysis and the resulting model applied to the validation group. The validity and predictive accuracy of the regression model was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve/area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Results CRP levels > 150 mg/l on postoperative day 2 and a rising CRP on day 3 were independently associated with all adverse events during the hospital admission. A weighted model was applied to the validation group yielding an AUC of 0.65 (95% CI 0.58–0.73) indicating, at best, modest discrimination and predictive accuracy for adverse events. Conclusion Measurement of CRP in patients after elective colorectal surgery in the first few days after surgery within ERAS can assist in identifying those at risk of adverse events and a prolonged hospital stay. A CRP value of > 150 mg/l on day 2 and a rising CRP on day 3 should alert the surgeon to an increased likelihood of such events.

In this paper the complications of ear piercing are considered and the treatment of resultant deformities is described.