Poor accuracy of freehand cup positioning during total hip arthroplasty

Several studies have demonstrated a correlation between the acetabular cup position and the risk of dislocation, wear and range of motion after total hip arthroplasty. The present study was designed to evaluate the accuracy of the surgeon’s estimated position of the cup after freehand placement in total hip replacement. Peroperative estimated abduction and anteversion of 200 acetabular components (placed by three orthopaedic surgeons and nine residents) were compared with measured outcomes (according to Pradhan) on postoperative radiographs. Cups were placed in 49.7° (SD 6.7) of abduction and 16.0° (SD 8.1) of anteversion. Estimation of placement was 46.3° (SD 4.3) of abduction and 14.6° (SD 5.9) of anteversion. Of more interest is the fact that for the orthopaedic surgeons the mean inaccuracy of estimation was 4.1° (SD 3.9) for abduction and 5.2° (SD 4.5) for anteversion and for their residents this was respectively, 6.3° (SD 4.6) and 5.7° (SD 5.0). Significant differences were found between orthopaedic surgeons and residents for inaccuracy of estimation for abduction, not for anteversion. Body mass index, sex, (un)cemented fixation and surgical approach (anterolateral or posterolateral) were not significant factors. Based upon the inaccuracy of estimation, the group’s chance on future cup placement within Lewinnek’s safe zone (5–25° anteversion and 30–50° abduction) is 82.7 and 85.2% for anteversion and abduction separately. When both parameters are combined, the chance of accurate placement is only 70.5%. The chance of placement of the acetabular component within 5° of an intended position, for both abduction and anteversion is 21.5% this percentage decreases to just 2.9% when the tolerated error is 1°. There is a tendency to underestimate both abduction and anteversion. Orthopaedic surgeons are superior to their residents in estimating abduction of the acetabular component. The results of this study indicate that freehand placement of the acetabular component is not a reliable method

Neurogenic inflammation after traumatic brain injury and its potentiation of classical inflammation

Background: The neuroinflammatory response following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is known to be a key secondary injury factor that can drive ongoing neuronal injury. Despite this, treatments that have targeted aspects of the inflammatory pathway have not shown significant efficacy in clinical trials. Main body: We suggest that this may be because classical inflammation only represents part of the story, with activation of neurogenic inflammation potentially one of the key initiating inflammatory events following TBI. Indeed, evidence suggests that the transient receptor potential cation channels (TRP channels), TRPV1 and TRPA1, are polymodal receptors that are activated by a variety of stimuli associated with TBI, including mechanical shear stress, leading to the release of neuropeptides such as substance P (SP). SP augments many aspects of the classical inflammatory response via activation of microglia and astrocytes, degranulation of mast cells, and promoting leukocyte migration. Furthermore, SP may initiate the earliest changes seen in blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability, namely the increased transcellular transport of plasma proteins via activation of caveolae. This is in line with reports that alterations in transcellular transport are seen first following TBI, prior to decreases in expression of tight-junction proteins such as claudin-5 and occludin. Indeed, the receptor for SP, the tachykinin NK1 receptor, is found in caveolae and its activation following TBI may allow influx of albumin and other plasma proteins which directly augment the inflammatory response by activating astrocytes and microglia. Conclusions: As such, the neurogenic inflammatory response can exacerbate classical inflammation via a positive feedback loop, with classical inflammatory mediators such as bradykinin and prostaglandins then further stimulating TRP receptors. Accordingly, complete inhibition of neuroinflammation following TBI may require the inhibition of both classical and neurogenic inflammatory pathways.Frances Corrigan, Kimberley A. Mander, Anna V. Leonard and Robert Vin