Paul A Banaszkiewicz Deiary F Kader Editors Classic Papers in Orthopaedics 123 Classic Papers in Orthopaedics Paul A Banaszkiewicz • Deiary F Kader Editors Classic Papers in Orthopaedics Editors Paul A Banaszkiewicz, FRCS (Tr & Orth), MClin Ed, FAcad MEd, FHEA Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics Queen Elizabeth Hospital Gateshead Northumbria University Newcastle Upon Tyne UK Deiary F Kader, FRCS (Tr & Orth), MFSEM (UK) Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics Queen Elizabeth Hospital Gateshead Northumbria University Newcastle Upon Tyne UK ISBN 978-1-4471-5450-1 ISBN 978-1-4471-5451-8 DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-5451-8 Springer London Heidelberg New York Dordrecht (eBook) Library of Congress Control Number: 2013957882 © Springer-Verlag London 2014 This work is subject to copyright All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher's location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center Violations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) Foreword Making the correct therapeutic decision when faced with challenging difficulties in which numerous alternatives exist is always difficult This is particularly so in orthopaedic surgery, where many choices are available for treating an individual with an injury or condition that affects the musculoskeletal system Making the wrong decision can result in significant morbidity and an impaired quality of life In the pre-Internet era, an orthopaedic surgeon would have relied on their past experience and information handed down to them from their teachers during their formative training, with assistance from a few textbooks or orthopaedic journals available in their local hospital library With the arrival of the Internet era, the capacity for acquiring information about the treatment and management of any injury has increased in a non-linear manner, to the point where now the problem has changed from having too little information to make an informed decision to having too much information available, which paradoxically has made making a management decision even more difficult, not just because of the amount of information available, but due to lack of certainty regarding its veracity and source Classic Papers in Orthopaedics has been written to assist in making more sense of the surfeit of information now available to the clinician or researcher with an interest in orthopaedics Using citation counts and other objective methods of evaluating both the influence and acclaim of what are regarded as the best scientific papers produced in different ‘areas’ of orthopaedic practice and basic orthopaedic science, the authors have put together a comprehensive and wonderfully readable selection of papers in Classic Papers in Orthopaedics Not only they name and describe these papers, but they also evaluate their scientific strengths and weaknesses, so that the clinician or scientist can make the best informed decision of how to use the data described most effectively in taking forward their field of interest They also have included general sections on interpreting and evaluating research that are helpful to the reader new to the research process This book will be of interest to orthopaedic trainees coming to terms with the wealth of information available that they need to make sense of in order to pass their higher specialist examinations It will be of interest to consultant orthopaedic surgeons who wish to remind themselves of the history of their particular field of interest It will interest scientists and researchers embarking on a research project in the field of orthopaedics It will be of interest to physiotherapists wishing to understand more about the orthopaedic management of the patients they treat It will also interest medical historians who wish to learn more about the history of the development of a particular orthopaedic technique In short, the book will be of interest to a wide variety of people, and I believe it will become a classic reference in its own right in the time ahead I would encourage you therefore to buy this book and use it to enhance your knowledge of both orthopaedic practice and the ‘art’ of the research endeavour itself I am sure you will enjoy reading it and learn from it as much as I did and that it will certainly become a treasured ‘gem’ on your bookshelf that you will continue to use as a decision-making aid and educational tool that is both useful and enjoyable to read Alan St Clair Gibson, MBChB, PhD, MD Department of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation University of Northumbria UK v Preface The seeds for this book were first sown as an orthopaedic trainee About months before the FRCS (Tr & Orth) orthopaedic exam, I found myself frantically searching for a book that summarized the key seminal orthopaedic papers that I needed to know to pass this exam I had become convinced my future examiners were going to grill me mercilessly on these classic orthopaedic articles and I would fail the exam if I couldn’t quote them verbatim I never found this book despite repeatedly being assured by various consultants that it was out there but perhaps out of print and probably out of date After passing the FRCS (Tr & Orth) exam I continued to search intermittently for this “Classic Papers in Orthopaedics” book I was convinced it still existed and that I would eventually find it if I looked hard enough for it One evening after another fruitless search for this Holy Grail on the Internet, it suddenly dawned on me that perhaps this book had never really existed in the first place I then began to wonder if we could perhaps take this project on board I was busy with a number of orthopaedic teaching and training projects and therefore quickly dismissed the idea Fast forward to 2010 and the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS-British) and Clinical Orthopaedic and Related Research (CORR) both published a paper citing the top 100 orthopaedic papers published in the orthopaedic literature Both top 100 listings were roughly the same and both lists essentially reflected the number of times an article was cited in specific orthopaedic journals In a moment of weakness we decided that perhaps the time was right to go ahead and get this book written As busy orthopaedic surgeons we not always have the time to be critical in identifying the key papers that influence our own practice It is revealing and very satisfying to go back to the core papers that changed the face of orthopaedics The book was more difficult to edit and manage than anticipated One main aim was to provide a story around each article We wanted to set the scene and describe where the subject stood before the classic paper had been published and how afterwards the paper had changed practice and stimulated further developments and research We stuck reasonably closely to citation frequency as a measure of whether or not to include an article despite accepting its inherent weaknesses Most authors realized this method would miss out some major articles of importance However citation frequency at least provided an initial framework to review a selected number of articles and authors were then free to revise this list if necessary In some of the smaller sections such as foot and ankle and orthopaedic oncology, a greater amount of freedom was given with article choice A new finding was that several orthopaedic journals had recently published reviews citing the top 100 or 50 articles in various orthopaedic subspecialties such as spinal surgery, shoulder and hands based on citation frequency alone in major data bases This made us realize we couldn’t review every single article that had attained classic status, and in many ways classic status didn’t always equate with the number of times an article was cited in the orthopaedic literature In addition, it made us more determined to add more substance to the book lest it deteriorated into a number crunching exercise, as we weren’t convinced with the arguments for objectivity with this method vii viii Preface Sometimes it was difficult to unravel why an article had reached classic status, and this required a lot of detective work We traced articles forward in time to ascertain where they had been cited in the literature On many occasions the last paper in a long line of references unlocked the door as to an article’s relevance and seminal status Whilst we acknowledge that regular journal club meetings are educationally very important for all grades of orthopaedic surgeons and not just orthopaedic trainees, we wanted to avoid the book coming across as some sort of high-ended journal club handout Each article has shaped orthopaedic practice and reflects the historical background and also gives insight into future developments We hope we have avoided this On several occasions we had to pull back from writing detailed biographies about the brilliance of many of the authors of these important groundbreaking papers There are a large number of well-written biography books in orthopaedics already and this was not our aim We did weaken a little with Charnley, Ilizarov, Mankin, Harris, Noyes and Insall who deserve special credit for their enormous contribution to orthopaedic surgery We originally decided to include a second section covering levels of evidence, how to review a scientific article and impact factor, but changed our minds as we thought most of our readership would be familiar with these subjects However, a large number of orthopaedic surgeons thought it was an excellent idea to include them as the relevant literature was sometimes difficult to find They persuaded us to change our minds and we think the book is better for this section We make no claim for the originality of the material contained in this book We are not attempting to re-invent the wheel A large amount of material contained in an article review was accumulated whilst forward reviewing the article’s relevance in its own citation list We have attempted to credit sources wherever possible We ask apologizes if we have omitted any one The ironies of this book are that the examiners never did grill me on any classic papers in the exam We did eventually manage to find the Holy Grail The Classics of Orthopaedics was edited by Edgar Bick and published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins in 1976 The book proved to be somewhat disappointing as it took the format of reprints of the original articles from various journals such as The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) and Clinical Orthopaedic and Related Research (CORR) Although there was a small author bibliography at the end of the article, there were no explanations or comments as to why these articles were considered classic papers or how and why they had changed the face of orthopaedics Gateshead, UK Gateshead, UK Paul A Banaszkiewicz Deiary F Kader Contents Part I Main Introduction Main Introduction Paul A Banaszkiewicz Part II Classic Papers in Hip Surgery: Introduction Classic Papers in Hip Surgery: Introduction Paul A Banaszkiewicz Traumatic Arthritis of the Hip After Dislocation and Acetabular Fractures: Treatment by Mold Arthroplasty: An End-Result Study Using a New Method of Result Evaluation Paul A Banaszkiewicz 13 Functional Results of Hip Arthroplasty with Acrylic Prosthesis Paul A Banaszkiewicz Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Total Hip Replacement A Standard System of Terminology for Reporting Results Paul A Banaszkiewicz 23 Prognosis of Total Hip Replacement in Sweden: Follow-Up of 92,675 Operations Performed 1978–1990 Paul A Banaszkiewicz 27 10 11 Improved Cementing Techniques and Femoral Component Loosening in Young Patients with Hip Arthroplasty: A 12-Year Radiographic Review Paul A Banaszkiewicz 19 31 “Modes of Failure” of Cemented Stem-Type Femoral Components: A Radiographic Analysis of Loosening Paul A Banaszkiewicz 35 Radiological Demarcation of Cemented Sockets in Total Hip Replacement Paul A Banaszkiewicz 39 Femoral Component Loosening Using Contemporary Techniques of Femoral Cement Fixation Paul A Banaszkiewicz 43 The Correlation Between the Roentgenographic Appearance and Operative Findings at the Bone-Cement Junction of the Socket in Charnley Low Friction Arthroplasties Paul A Banaszkiewicz 47 ix How to Get Published and Impact Factors 159 Arkan S Sayed-Noor, Göran O Sjödén, and Raymond Pollock 159.1 Introduction Publication of scientific work is an integral part of every researcher’s professional life Science progression, dissemination of research findings, health care improvement and self-promotion are some of the motivations why researchers have to write and publish their work Unfortunately, the task of proper scientific writing and publication is not an easy one and can only be improved with regular practice For the beginners, writing in a scientific style can be a daunting process In addition picking the right journal is a crucial part of getting the work accepted for publication This may require a wide knowledge of the technical requirements of each scientific journal The aim of this chapter is to provide the reader with some fundamental guidelines to assist authors in acquiring the necessary skills to write a scientific paper and getting it published 159.2 When Should You Consider Publishing The suitability of a scientific paper for publication depends on numerous factors One important factor is the paper’s message: how original, clear and important it is and how much impact it will have on our knowledge in that particular field? Does it fill a gap or have specific implications? Another important factor is the target audience Who will be interested in reading your paper? Most scientific papers are written for a specific journal and its audience A third important factor is the scientific validity of the paper This refers to the accuracy of the design and methods used throughout the study and the A.S Sayed-Noor, MD, PhD, FRCS • G.O Sjưdén, MD, PhD Department of Orthopaedics, Sundsvall Teaching Hospital, Umea University, Umea, Sweden R Pollock, PhD, MPH (*) Spinal Unit, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton on Tees, England, UK e-mail: raypoll@pollock.org.uk P.A Banaszkiewicz, D.F Kader (eds.), Classic Papers in Orthopaedics, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-5451-8_159, © Springer-Verlag London 2014 interpretation of the results and the conclusions drawn (internal validity) Furthermore, how can the study findings be applied to the general population (external validity) The latter issue is poorly investigated in orthopedic papers [1] 159.3 How to Write a Scientific Manuscript The number of orthopedic journals publishing scientific peer-reviewed manuscripts has increased during the last decade Most of these journals are however open-access and online only journals, allowing everyone to view the contents free of charge Apparently, this makes it easier for the published manuscripts to reach the target audience and subsequently to be cited In order to cover the production expenses, these journals charge a processing fee of variable amounts depending on the journal and type of manuscript Moreover, most of these journals have not yet been indexed in PubMed/Medline or not have an impact factor due to their relative novelty Therefore the demands of these journals to accept the submitted manuscripts are rather low As with other skills related to scientific production, writing a scientific manuscript for an orthopedic journal needs a lot of practice and mainly relies on focus and brevity The novice writer can adhere to the guidelines for writing style provided by the American Medical Association (AMA) manual of style (ref www.amamanualofstyle.com) or the orthopedic journals e.g CORR® [2] These guidelines can more or less apply to many journals As you write more papers you will develop your own style The following is often considered as the minimal requirement in writing a scientific manuscript but the exact headings will be dictated by the journal’s instruction to authors 159.3.1 Title The title is the first part of your manuscript that is seen by the readers You should therefore carefully choose your 609 610 words in order to make readers aware of your message already at this stage The title can be written in different ways For instance, a manuscript dealing with the effect of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty can be titled as “Leg length discrepancy after total arthroplasty is not important” or “Leg length discrepancy after total arthroplasty, does it matter?” or as “The effect of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty” The first and second example may appear more interesting than the third way However, the choice depends on the type of study and the strength of your results Some journals use a main title and a subtitle A short or running title is also sometimes required which will appear at the top of the manuscript paper Read the “instruction to authors” as different journals have different requirements 159.3.2 Abstract This part is crucial It is a brief summary of the manuscript, usually arranged with the following headings: background or purpose, material and methods, results and conclusion The word limit for the abstract varies among journals but is about 250–350 words to avoid unnecessary generality The abstract can either be written initially at the start of writing the manuscript or else you can leave it to the end The former way has the advantage of giving the author a plan to write the manuscript However, the content of the manuscript can change during the writing process and therefore at the end of the paper the abstract should be revised if necessary Remember that reader’s use electronic databases e.g PubMed/Medline when they search the literature When relevant manuscripts are found, most readers relay only on the abstracts of these manuscripts to decide whether they want to read the entire manuscript Therefore poorly written abstracts diminish the chance of the manuscript being read in full and then cited A.S Sayed-Noor et al 159.3.4 Material and Methods There is no doubt that this section of the manuscript is the most interesting part to the editor and reviewers of the journal to which you submit your work One has to give adequate details such that another investigator can replicate the study The section can preferably start with the ethical approval of the study, declaring whether the study was carried out according to the Declaration of Helsinki You should also state if informed consent was obtained In order to ensure appropriate reporting of randomized trials, the CONSORT statement [3] reporting system should be used In the material (patients) part, details about the inclusion and exclusion criteria should be provided On the method part, the following details are important: study design and sample selection (prospective study, consecutive or selected, randomized double-blinded, randomized singleblinded, randomized open, stratified, retrospective study, cohort study, case–control or case series) When comparing two or more parameters or modalities, a power analysis is required to calculate the sample size/number of included patients needed to reach a significant difference between the studied outcome measures The outcome measures/indexes used in the study should be validated and reliable It is important to outline in detail how the evaluation of the results was carried out e.g an independent observer and whether he or she was blinded to the study A separate paragraph on statistical analysis is typically needed The statistical methods used to measure the outcome of the study and level of significance (p value