The angle of inclination of the acetabular component in total hip replacement is a recognised contributing factor in dislocation and early wear. During non-navigated surgery, insertion of the acetabular component has traditionally been performed at an angle of 45 degrees relative to the sagittal plane as judged by the surgeon's eye, the operative inclination. Typically, the method used to assess inclination is the measurement made on the postoperative anteroposterior radiograph, the radiological inclination. The aim of this study was to measure the intra-operative angle of inclination of the acetabular component on 60 consecutive patients in the lateral decubitus position when using a posterior approach during total hip replacement. This was achieved by taking intra-operative photographs of the acetabular inserter, representing the acetabular axis, and a horizontal reference. The results were compared with the post-operative radiological inclination. The mean post-operative radiological inclination was 13 degrees greater than the photographed operative inclination, which was unexpectedly high. It appears that in the lateral decubitus position with a posterior approach, the uppermost hemipelvis adducts, thus reducing the apparent operative inclination. Surgeons using the posterior approach in lateral decubitus need to aim for a lower operative inclination than when operating with the patient supine in order to achieve an acceptable radiological inclination.

This case report involves a 59-year-old woman with a traumatic right intertrochanteric hip fracture below a previous Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR). This woman had almost an identical fracture on the left hip 3 years before which was treated with a proximal femoral locking compression plate. Of note periprosthetic fractures following hip resurfacing are usually subcapital and treated with a revision or conservative management. We present an unusual surgical problem that has occurred twice in the same patient and has been treated effectively on both occasions using proximal femoral plating. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no other reports of bilateral periprosthetic fractures being treated in this way.

Adequate correction of valgus knee deformity was successfully achieved using this modified technique with satisfactory medium-term outcome and avoidance of instability.

Revision ACL reconstruction with autograft affords satisfactory long-term outcomes. Expectations should be carefully managed in patients with increasing age associated with severe chondral damage and previous medial meniscectomy.

Introduction Patients receiving musculoskeletal allografts may be at risk of postoperative infection. The General Medical Council guidelines on consent highlight the importance of providing patients with the information they want or need on any proposed investigation or treatment, including any potential adverse outcomes. With the increased cost of defending medicolegal claims, it is paramount that adequate, clear informed patient consent be documented. Methods We retrospectively examined the patterns of informed consent for allograft bone use during elective orthopaedic procedures in a large unit with an onsite bone bank. The initial audit included patients operated over the course of 1 year. Following a feedback session, a re-audit was performed to identify improvements in practice. Results The case mix of both studies was very similar. Revision hip arthroplasty surgery constituted the major subgroup requiring allograft (48%), followed by foot and ankle surgery (16.3%) and revision knee arthroplasty surgery (11.4%) .On the initial audit, 17/45 cases (38%) had either adequate preoperative documentation of the outpatient discussion or an appropriately completed consent form on the planned use of allograft. On the re-audit, 44/78 cases (56%) had adequate pre-operative documentation. There was little correlation between how frequently a surgeon used allograft and the adequacy of consent (Correlation coefficient -0.12). Conclusions Although the risk of disease transmission with allograft may be variable, informed consent for allograft should be a routine part of preoperative discussions in elective orthopaedic surgery. Regular audit and feedback sessions may further improve consent documentation, alongside the targeting of high volume/low compliance surgeons.