Effect of local anaesthetic infiltration on chronic postsurgical pain after total hip and knee replacement:The APEX randomised controlled trials

Total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) are usually effective at relieving pain; however, 7% to 23% of patients experience chronic postsurgical pain. These trials aimed to investigate the effect of local anaesthetic wound infiltration on pain severity at 12 months after primary THR or TKR for osteoarthritis. Between November 2009 and February 2012, 322 patients listed for THR and 316 listed for TKR were recruited into a single-centre double-blind randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive local anaesthetic infiltration and standard care or standard care alone. Participants and outcomes assessors were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was pain severity on the WOMAC Pain Scale at 12 months after surgery. Analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat and per-protocol approaches. In the hip trial, patients in the intervention group had significantly less pain at 12 months postoperative than patients in the standard care group (differences in means: 4.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-8.54; P = 0.015), although the difference was not clinically significant. Post hoc analysis found that patients in the intervention group were more likely to have none to moderate pain than severe pain at 12 months than those in the standard care group (odds ratio: 10.19; 95% CI: 2.10-49.55; P = 0.004). In the knee trial, there was no strong evidence that the intervention influenced pain severity at 12 months postoperative (difference in means: 3.83; 95% CI: −0.83 to 8.49; P = 0.107). In conclusion, routine use of infiltration could be beneficial in improving long-term pain relief for some patients after THR

The choice between hip prosthetic bearing surfaces in total hip replacement:a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic hip implants have many combinations of bearing surface materials, sizes, and fixation techniques, which can determine the quality of life of patients after primary total hip replacement (THR) and the likelihood of needing revision surgery. When an implant fails, patients require revision THR, which is distressing to the patient and expensive for the health care payer. Primary THR is one of the most common elective procedures performed worldwide, with over 300,000 performed annually in the USA and over 80,000 in England and Wales. It is important to review all available randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence to determine which implant bearing surface materials, size, and fixation technique are most effective for patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing outcomes of hip implant bearing surfaces, size, and fixation techniques used in THR. Implant combinations compared in the literature include four bearing surface combinations (metal-on-polyethylene, metal-on-metal, ceramic-on-polyethylene, and ceramic-on-ceramic); two femoral head sizes (large vs small heads); and four fixation techniques (uncemented, cemented, hybrid, and reverse hybrids). The primary outcome will be revision surgery. We will also collect data on patient characteristics, mortality, quality of life, and other outcomes. In network meta-analysis, we will estimate the relative effectiveness of every implant bearing surface, head size (large vs small), and fixation permutation, using evidence where implants have been compared directly in an RCT and indirectly through common comparators in different RCTs. DISCUSSION: There has been much debate about materials used for prosthetic implants in THR. Different combinations of prosthetic materials, sizes, and fixation, can vary widely in cost and fail at different rates for different patient groups. Given the number of THRs performed yearly, and the increasing use of expensive implants, it is important to review evidence to inform surgeons, patients, and health care providers of optimal implant bearing combinations for given patient characteristics. This review will inform a cost-effectiveness model that will include evidence from other sources, to determine the most effective and cost-effective implant bearing combination for patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD4201501943

p73 is required for appropriate BMP-induced mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition during somatic cell reprogramming

The generation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by somatic cell reprogramming holds great potential for modeling human diseases. However, the reprogramming process remains very inefficient and a better understanding of its basic biology is required. The mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition (MET) has been recognized as a crucial step for the successful reprogramming of fibroblasts into iPSCs. It has been reported that the p53 tumor suppressor gene acts as a barrier of this process, while its homolog p63 acts as an enabling factor. In this regard, the information concerning the role of the third homolog, p73, during cell reprogramming is limited. Here, we derive total Trp73 knockout mouse embryonic fibroblasts, with or without Trp53, and examine their reprogramming capacity. We show that p73 is required for effective reprogramming by the Yamanaka factors, even in the absence of p53. Lack of p73 affects the early stages of reprogramming, impairing the MET and resulting in altered maturation and stabilization phases. Accordingly, the obtained p73-deficient iPSCs have a defective epithelial phenotype and alterations in the expression of pluripotency markers. We demonstrate that p73 deficiency impairs the MET, at least in part, by hindering BMP pathway activation. We report that p73 is a positive modulator of the BMP circuit, enhancing its activation by DNp73 repression of the Smad6 promoter. Collectively, these findings provide mechanistic insight into the MET process, proposing p73 as an enhancer of MET during cellular reprogramming.Peer reviewe

Cost-Effectiveness of Group-Based Outpatient Physical Therapy After Total Knee Replacement: Results From the Economic Evaluation Alongside the ARENA Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective To assess the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of a group-based outpatient physical therapy intervention delivered six-weeks after primary total knee replacement (TKR) compared with usual care, alongside the Activity-orientated REhabilitation following kNee Arthroplasty (ARENA) multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Methods The economic analyses were performed from the perspective of the health and social care payer. We collected resource use for health and social care and productivity losses, and patient outcomes for 12 months after surgery to derive costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results were expressed in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and incremental net monetary benefit statistics (INMBs) for a society willing-to-pay £20,000 per QALY gained, with sensitivity analyses to model specification and perspective. Results ARENA physical therapy classes cost, on average, £179 (SD=£39) per patient. Treatment in the year following surgery cost, on average, £1,739 (95%CI -£742, £4,221) per patient in the intervention group (n=89), an additional £346 (95%CI £38, £653) compared with usual care (n=91, £1,393;95%CI -£780, £3568). QALY benefits were 0.0506 higher (95%CI 0.009, 0.09) in the intervention group, corresponding to an additional 19 days in perfect health. The ICER for the intervention was £6,842 per QALY gained and the INMB was £665 (, 95%CI £139, £1,191) with a 92% probability of being cost-effective, and no less than 73% in all sensitivity analysis scenarios. Conclusion The addition of group-based outpatient physical therapy classes to usual care improves quality-of-life and is a cost-effective treatment option following TKR for a society willing-to-pay £20,000 per QALY gained

Patients’ recovery of mobility and return to original residence after hip fracture are associated with multiple modifiable components of hospital service organisation: the REDUCE record-linkage cohort study in England and Wales

Background: Hip fractures are devastating injuries causing disability, dependence, and institutionalisation, yet hospital care is highly variable. This study aimed to determine hospital organisational factors associated with recovery of mobility and change in patient residence after hip fracture. Methods: A cohort of patients aged 60 + years in England and Wales, who sustained a hip fracture from 2016 to 2019 was examined. Patient-level Hospital Episodes Statistics, National Hip Fracture Database, and mortality records were linked to 101 factors derived from 18 hospital-level organisational metrics. After adjustment for patient case-mix, multilevel models were used to identify organisational factors associated with patient residence at discharge, and mobility and residence at 120 days after hip fracture. Results: Across 172 hospitals, 165,350 patients survived to discharge, of whom 163,230 (99%) had post-hospital discharge destination recorded. 18,323 (11%) died within 120 days. Among 147,027 survivors, 58,344 (40%) across 143 hospitals had their residence recorded, and 56,959 (39%) across 140 hospitals had their mobility recorded, at 120 days. Nineteen organisational factors independently predicted residence on hospital discharge e.g., return to original residence was 31% (95% confidence interval, CI:17–43%) more likely if the anaesthetic lead for hip fracture had time allocated in their job plan, and 8–13% more likely if hip fracture service clinical governance meetings were attended by an orthopaedic surgeon, physiotherapist or anaesthetist. Seven organisational factors independently predicted residence at 120 days. Patients returning to their pre-fracture residence was 26% (95%CI:4–42%) more likely if hospitals had a dedicated hip fracture ward, and 20% (95%CI:8–30%) more likely if treatment plans were proactively discussed with patients and families on admission. Seventeen organisational factors predicted mobility at 120 days. More patients re-attained their pre-fracture mobility in hospitals where (i) care involved an orthogeriatrician (15% [95%CI:1-28%] improvement), (ii) general anaesthesia was usually accompanied by a nerve block (7% [95%CI:1-12%], and (iii) bedside haemoglobin testing was routine in theatre recovery (13% [95%CI:6-20%]). Conclusions: Multiple, potentially modifiable, organisational factors are associated with patient outcomes up to 120 days after a hip fracture, these factors if causal should be targeted by service improvement initiatives to reduce variability, improve hospital hip fracture care, and maximise patient independence