Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Tim Kraal x
Clear All Modify Search
Tim Kraal Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Tim Kraal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Lijkele Beimers Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Slotervaart Center of Orthopedic Research & Education (SCORE), The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Lijkele Beimers in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Bertram The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Bertram The in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Inger Sierevelt Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Slotervaart Center of Orthopedic Research & Education (SCORE), The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Inger Sierevelt in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Michel van den Bekerom Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Michel van den Bekerom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Denise Eygendaal Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Denise Eygendaal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

  • Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) for frozen shoulder (FS) leads to a considerable increase in range of motion and Oxford shoulder score, a significant reduction in pain and around 85% satisfaction.

  • A clearly defined indication for MUA in FS patients cannot be extracted from this review or the available literature. The associating criteria before proceeding to MUA vary widely.

  • All but one study in this review lacked a control group without intervention. Therefore, firm conclusions about the role of MUA in the treatment of FS cannot be drawn from the current literature.

  • An overall complication rate of 0.4% was found and a re-intervention rate of 14%, although most of the included papers were not designed to monitor complications.

  • The following criteria before proceeding to MUA are proposed: a patient unable to cope with a stiff and painful shoulder; clinical signs of a stage 2 idiopathic FS; lessening pain in relation to stage 1; external rotation < 50% compared to contralateral shoulder joint; a minimal duration of symptoms of three months; and failure to respond to an intra-articular corticosteroid infiltration.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:98-109. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180044

Open access

Low-dose dexamethasone during arthroplasty

What do we know about the risks?

Jessica T. Wegener Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center (AMC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Jessica T. Wegener in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Tim Kraal Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center and the Orthopedic Research Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Tim Kraal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Markus F. Stevens Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center (AMC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Markus F. Stevens in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Markus W. Hollmann Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center (AMC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Markus W. Hollmann in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Gino M.M.J. Kerkhoffs Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center and the Orthopedic Research Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Gino M.M.J. Kerkhoffs in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Daniël Haverkamp Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Slotervaart Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Daniël Haverkamp in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

  • Dexamethasone is commonly applied during arthroplasty to control post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV). However, conflicting views of orthopaedic surgeons and anaesthesiologists regarding the use of dexamethasone raise questions about risks of impaired wound healing and surgical site infections (SSI).

  • The aim of this systematic review is to determine the level of evidence for the safety of a peri-operative single low dose of dexamethasone in hip and knee arthroplasty.

  • We systematically reviewed literature in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases and cited references in articles found in the initial search from 1980 to 2013 based on predefined inclusion criteria. The review was completed with a ‘pro’ and ‘con’ discussion.

  • After identifying 11 studies out of 104, only eight studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 1335 patients were studied without any incidence of SSI. Causes of SSI are multifactorial. Therefore, 27 205 patients would be required (power = 90%, alpha = 0.05) to provide substantiated conclusions on safety of a single low dose of dexamethasone.

  • Positively, many studies demonstrated showed convincing effects of low-dose dexamethasone on prevention of PONV and dose-dependent effects on post-operative pain and quality of recovery. Dexamethasone induces hyperglycaemia, but none of the studies demonstrated a concomitant SSI.

  • Conversely, animal studies showed that high dose dexamethasone inhibits wound healing.

  • A team approach of anaesthesiologists and orthopaedic surgeons is mandatory in order to balance the risk–benefit ratio of peri-operatively applied steroids for individual arthroplasty patients.

  • We did not find evidence that a single low dose of dexamethasone contributes to SSI or wound healing impairment from the current studies.

Cite this article: Wegener JT, Kraal T, Stevens MF, Hollman MW, Kerkhoffs GMMJ, Haverkamp D. Low-dose dexamethasone during arthroplasty: what do we know about the risks? EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:303-309. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000039.

Open access