PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Steven T Woolson

Publications and source records attributed to Steven T Woolson.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

In the absence of evidence--why bother? A literature review of minimally invasive total hip replacement surgery.

Two new total hip replacement (THR) procedures have been termed minimally invasive. It is claimed that these smaller incision techniques reduce soft-tissue trauma, decrease postoperative pain and blood loss, speed recovery, and reduce the length of the hospital stay compared with hip replacement using the standard incision technique. These new procedures use either one small 6- to 10-cm incision through a posterior, lateral, or anterior approach or two very small (a 2.5 cm posterior incision for placement of the femoral component and a 5-cm anterior incision for placement of the acetabular component) incisions to accomplish the same THR procedure that requires a standard length incision of 15 to 20 cm. Controversy exists on whether these small incision THRs are actually minimally invasive. It is debated whether a small skin incision that requires the application of high forces on the soft tissues for exposure of the joint but less muscle dissection will produce less overall trauma to the patient than a larger incision with wider muscle dissection but with lower retraction forces. If small incision THR techniques are less traumatic overall, then they should produce less pain, lower transfusion requirements, a shorter hospital stay, and a faster recovery for patients. The other important issues regarding small incision procedures are whether the decreased visualization provided by these techniques is adequate to prevent a higher complication rate from damage to the surrounding neurovascular structures and outcomes that are equivalent to those found for THR using the standard technique. A review of the literature to date provides no convincing evidence of any significant advantages of small incision THR compared with standard incision THR other than a shorter surgical scar. Comparison studies that prove both significant advantages and low complication rates for small incision THR are needed before these procedures can be recommended for general use.

Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip↗
PubMed2005

Comparison of scars from total hip replacements done with a standard or a mini-incision.

UNLABELLED: Scar cosmesis is one of the proposed benefits of mini-incision total hip replacement as opposed to standard-incision procedures; however, there has been no scientific proof of this clinical outcome. The cosmetic appearances of healed incisions of 34 primary total hip replacement procedures done by one surgeon using either a mini-incision (20 procedures) or a standard-length incision (14 procedures) were compared at an average of 2 years postoperatively. Each scar's appearance was graded independently by two plastic surgeons using a standardized rating system. Patients answered a questionnaire regarding their subjective assessment of their scar. The blinded observers found that more mini-scars (six of 20) were rated poor than standard scars (one of 14) and that more standard-incision patients had scars that were rated good. More mini-incision patients (two of 20 versus zero of 14) had wound-healing problems. All the patients thought that their hip scar was acceptable in appearance, but 30 of 31 patients rated the relief of pain and total hip replacement longevity as higher priorities than scar cosmesis. The cosmesis of mini-incision total hip replacement scars may be inferior to standard-incision scars because of skin and soft tissue damage produced by high retractor pressures needed for exposure using a limited skin incision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level II-2 (prospective comparative study). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Mobile- vs. fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiologic study.

A consecutive series of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using either a mobile-bearing (MB) or a fixed-bearing (FB) implant were studied. Forty-four patients received 57 MB rotating platforms, and 40 patients received 45 FB posterior stabilized implants. At an average 41-month follow-up (range, 2-6 years), no significant differences were found between the groups with respect to Knee Society ratings or pain scores. Postoperative flexion was not different between the groups (116 degrees for MB and 118 degrees for FB). Three MB knees were revised for implant-related complications. There was no difference between these MB or FB knee implants clinically or radiographically at early follow-up. However, more patients with a MB knee required early revision for failure of rotating patellar or tibial polyethylene implants.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a standard incision or a mini-incision.

BACKGROUND: Primary total hip replacement performed through an incision that is </=10 cm in length has been advocated as a minimally invasive technique. Proponents have claimed that mini-incision techniques reduce blood loss, transfusion requirements, postoperative pain, and the length of the hospital stay compared with standard techniques through a longer incision. However, we are aware of no well-designed comparison study that supports these claims. The purpose of the present study was to compare the short-term results of a mini-incision with a standard incision technique for total hip replacement. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients who underwent 135 primary unilateral total hip replacements (fifty with use of a mini-incision [</=10 cm] and eighty-five with use of a standard incision) by three surgeons at one hospital were studied. Each surgeon selected patients to have a mini-incision procedure and performed a standard approach in the remaining patients. A posterior approach was used for all procedures. In-hospital data were collected retrospectively, and the initial postoperative radiographs were analyzed. Because of the selection process, the patients who had a mini-incision had both a significantly lower average body-mass index (p = 0.008) and a lower average score on the American Society of Anesthesiologists rating (p = 0.006), indicating that they were thinner and healthier than the patients who had a standard incision. RESULTS: With the numbers of patients available, no significant differences were found between the groups with respect to the average surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, in-hospital transfusion rate, length of hospital stay, or the patients' disposition after discharge. The mini-incision group was found to have a significantly higher risk of a wound complication (p = 0.02), a higher percentage of acetabular component malposition (p = 0.04), and poor fit and fill of femoral components inserted without cement (p = 0.0036). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that the mini-incision technique resulted in less bleeding or less trauma to the soft tissues of the hip, factors that would have produced a quicker recovery and a shorter hospital stay, than did the standard technique. The present study, which was based on the authors' initial experience with the mini-incision technique, failed to confirm the positive clinical outcomes reported by previous uncontrolled cohort studies, and the findings suggest that further analysis of this new technique is needed before it can be recommended for general use.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Autologous blood transfusion after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, prospective study comparing predonated and postoperative salvage blood.

A randomized, prospective study of the use of allogeneic blood was performed in a consecutive series of patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and had autologous transfusion either from one unit of predonated autologous blood or from postoperative unwashed blood salvage. In this study, 83 patients (88 knees) were included, with 47 knees in the salvage group and 41 in the predonation group. There were no differences between groups in average age, height, and weight, or gender, diagnoses, or anesthesia type. No significant difference was seen between the groups in the prevalence of allogeneic blood transfusion (5% for the predonation group and 0% for salvage group). Postoperative blood salvage was as effective as predonated autologous blood in preventing the risk associated with allogeneic blood after TKA.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

The effect of partial or full weight bearing ambulation after cementless total hip arthroplasty.

The clinical and radiographic results of 46 patients who underwent 50 consecutive primary total hip arthroplasties using a fully porous-coated collared femoral component were determined at a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Twenty-four patients (25 hips) who were allowed to bear full weight immediately postoperatively were compared with a historical control group of 24 patients (25 hips) who were instructed to bear < or =50 lb of weight for 6 weeks. The average Harris hip score for the partial weight bearing group was 95 compared with 97 for the full weight bearing group. All femoral components in both groups had radiographic evidence of bone ingrowth fixation at the final follow-up. When solid initial fixation is obtained intraoperatively and radiographically using a fully porous-coated (AML) femoral component, it seems that bone ingrowth fixation reliably occurs whether or not a partial or full weight-bearing postoperative protocol is followed.

Adult↗