Sir,
We welcome the article by Timperley et al which acknowledges
the recommendations made by the recent National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) Rapid Response Report (RRR).1 In undertaking this work, it was clear that there was plurality of
discourse on the issue of cemented versus non-cemented arthroplasties
within the orthopaedic community.
We agree with the value of specialised protocols where and when
cement is used. These, together with other points that provide guidance on
mitigating the risk in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty, are mentioned
in our report.1 Whereas Timperley et al correctly point out the low
number of deaths reported to the National Reporting and Learning System
(NRLS), a voluntary reporting system, this figure may conceal a higher
number which have not been reported. These deaths are likely to have
occurred during the early peri-operative phase and we doubt that current
research methodologies will ever pick up the true impact of the problem.
Higher quality evidence remains conspicuously absent. 2-4
The question remains regarding the 26 deaths. Do we accept these as
an insignificant number and consider them as expected surgical mortality
or do we try and prevent future recurrences?
The Chief Medical Officer’s annual report (2007) stressed the need to
find ways of reducing bone-cement implantation syndrome.5,6 One way of
facilitating greater clarity about safety considerations would be for
orthopaedic surgeons and anaesthetists to continue reporting possible
safety incidents related to bone cement to the NPSA in as much detail as possible, to allow meaningful interrogation of
these data.1 Perhaps the orthopaedic community would also consider
using innovative research methodologies to assess the complications of
cemented versus uncemented prostheses?
We look forward to working with other stakeholders such as the
National Joint Registry (NJR), quality control bodies such as the National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) that are in a position
to recommend on the best form of fixation and the orthopaedic community
to promote the development of a robust evidence base in this neglected
area.
S.S. Panesar, Clinical Advisor to the Medical Director,
P. Roberts,
J. Scarpello,
K. Cleary,
M. Bhandari,
A. Sheikh,
National Patient Safety Agency,
London, UK.
1. National Patient Safety Agency. Mitigating surgical risk in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty for
fractures of the proximal femur.
http://www.npsa.nhs.uk/nrls/alerts-and-directives/rapidrr/mitigating-risks
-when-using-bone-cement-in-hip-surgery/ (accessed 30/07/09)
2. Parker MJ, Gurusamy K. Arthroplasties (with and without bone
cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst
Rev 2006;3:CD001706.
3. Ahn J, Man LX, Park S, Sodl JF, Esterhai JL. Systematic review of
cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty outcomes for femoral neck
fractures. Clin Orthop 2008;466:2513-8.
4. Cai XZ, Chen XZ, Yan SG. Letter to the editor: cemented
hemiarthroplasty confers less pain and better mobility than uncemented
hemiarthroplasty. Clin Orthop 2009;467:582-4.
5. Donaldson AJ, Thomson HE, Harper NJ, Kenny NW. Bone cement
implantation syndrome. Br J Anaesth 2009;102:12-22.
6. Department of Health. On the state of public health: annual report of the
Chief Medical Officer 2007. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/AnnualReports/DH_086176
(accessed 30/07/09).