Intra-articular drug delivery has a number of advantages over systemic administration; however, for the past 20 years, intra-articular treatment options for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) have been limited to analgesics, glucocorticoids, hyaluronic acid (HA) and a small number of unproven alternative therapies. Although HA and glucocorticoids can provide clinically meaningful benefits to an appreciable number of patients, emerging evidence indicates that the apparent effectiveness of these treatments is largely a result of other factors, including the placebo effect. Biologic drugs that target inflammatory processes are used to manage rheumatoid arthritis, but have failed to translate to OA. A lack of high-level evidence and methodological limitations hinder our understanding of so called ‘stem’ cell therapies and, although the off-label administration of intra-articular cell therapies (such as platelet-rich plasma and bone marrow aspirate concentrate) is common, high-quality clinical data is needed before these treatments can be recommended. A number of promising intra-articular treatments are currently in clinical development in the United States, including small-molecule and biologic therapies, devices, and gene therapies. Although the prospect of new, non-surgical treatments for OA is exciting, the benefits new treatments must be carefully weighed against their costs and potential risks.

In all, 145 of 160 hips (90%) were considered safe from impingement. Patients with highest risk are those with biological or surgical spinal fusion; patients with dangerous spinal imbalance can be safe with correct acetabular component position. The clinical relevance of the study is that it correlates acetabular component position to spinal pelvic mobility which provides guidelines for total hip arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(1 Supple A):37-45.

* Spine-pelvis-hip motion is normally coordinated to allow balance of the mass of the trunk and hip motion with standing and sitting.* Normal motion from standing to sitting involves hip flexion of 55° to 70° and pelvic posterior tilt of 20°. Because the acetabulum is part of the pelvis, as the pelvis tilts posteriorly during sitting, the inclination and anteversion increase (the acetabulum opens) to allow clearance of the femoral head and neck during hip flexion. This can be considered the biological opening of the acetabulum.* Decreased tilt of the pelvis during movement occurs with stiffness of the spine. Loss of pelvic mobility forces hip motion to increase to accommodate postural change. Increased hip motion combined with change in the opening of the acetabulum increases the risk of impingement.* Hip stiffness can also reduce pelvic mobility because pelvic mobility is affected by both the spine and the hip. Relief of hip stiffness with total hip replacement can improve pelvic mobility postoperatively.* For hip surgeons, the clinical consequences of changes in the mobility of the spine and pelvis (spinopelvic mobility) can be impingement after total hip replacement, with the most obvious complication being dislocation. The reported increased dislocations in patients with surgical spine fusions is a clinical example of this consequence.

No abstract

Recent changes in healthcare and advances in technology have increased the use of large-volume national databases in surgical research. These databases have been used to develop perioperative risk stratification tools, assess postoperative complications, calculate costs, and investigate numerous other topics across multiple surgical specialties. The results of these studies contain variable information but are subject to unique limitations.The use of large-volume national databases is increasing in popularity, and thorough understanding of these databases will allow for a more sophisticated and better educated interpretation of studies that utilize such databases. This review will highlight the composition, strengths, and weaknesses of commonly used national databases in surgical research.