Aims The primary aim was to assess the independent influence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on 30-day mortality for patients with a hip fracture. The secondary aims were to determine whether: 1) there were clinical predictors of COVID-19 status; and 2) whether social lockdown influenced the incidence and epidemiology of hip fractures. Methods A national multicentre retrospective study was conducted of all patients presenting to six trauma centres or units with a hip fracture over a 46-day period (23 days pre- and 23 days post-lockdown). Patient demographics, type of residence, place of injury, presentation blood tests, Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, time to surgery, operation, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, anaesthetic, length of stay, COVID-19 status, and 30-day mortality were recorded. Results Of 317 patients with acute hip fracture, 27 (8.5%) had a positive COVID-19 test. Only seven (26%) had suggestive symptoms on admission. COVID-19-positive patients had a significantly lower 30-day survival compared to those without COVID-19 (64.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 45.7 to 83.3 vs 91.7%, 95% CI 88.2 to 94.8; p < 0.001). COVID-19 was independently associated with increased 30-day mortality risk adjusting for: 1) age, sex, type of residence (hazard ratio (HR) 2.93; p = 0.008); 2) Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (HR 3.52; p = 0.001); and 3) ASA (HR 3.45; p = 0.004). Presentation platelet count predicted subsequent COVID-19 status; a value of < 217 × 109/l was associated with 68% area under the curve (95% CI 58 to 77; p = 0.002) and a sensitivity and specificity of 63%. A similar number of patients presented with hip fracture in the 23 days pre-lockdown (n = 160) and 23 days post-lockdown (n = 157) with no significant (all p ≥ 0.130) difference in patient demographics, residence, place of injury, Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, time to surgery, ASA, or management. Conclusion COVID-19 was independently associated with an increased 30-day mortality rate for patients with a hip fracture. Notably, most patients with hip fracture and COVID-19 lacked suggestive symptoms at presentation. Platelet count was an indicator of risk of COVID-19 infection. These findings have implications for the management of hip fractures, in particular the need for COVID-19 testing.

AIMTo systematically examine and quantify the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in hip fracture surgery. METHODSA systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, AMED, CiNAHL, and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Two assessors independently screened search outputs for potentially relevant articles which met the eligibility criteria. The primary outcome measure was requirement of post-operative blood transfusion. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the ROBINS-I tool for observational studies. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD) and mean difference (MD) values for dichotomous and continuous data outcomes, respectively. The interpretation of each outcome was made using the GRADE approach. RESULTSOf 102 studies identified, seven met the inclusion criteria including a total of 770 participants (TXA: 341; Control: 429). On metaanalysis, intravenous TXA resulted in a 46% risk reduction in blood transfusion requirement compared to a placebo/control group (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.35-0.85; I 2 : 78%; Inconsistency (χ 2 ) P = <0.0001; n = 750). There was also a significantly higher postoperative haemoglobin for TXA versus placebo/control (MD: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.45-1.18; I 2 : 46%; Inconsistency (χ 2 ) P = 0.10; n = 638). There was no increased risk of thromboembolic events (RD: 0.01; 95% CI: À0.03, 0.05; I 2 : 68%; Inconsistency (χ 2 ) P = 0.007, n = 683). CONCLUSIONThere is moderate quality evidence that TXA reduces blood transfusion in hip fracture surgery, with low quality evidence suggesting no increased risk of thrombotic events. These findings are consistent with TXA use in other orthopaedic procedures.

Background Humeral shaft fractures are common but debate still occurs as to whether these are best managed operatively or non-operatively. We sought to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies to clarify the optimal treatment. Methods We performed a search for all randomised and non-randomised comparative studies on humeral shaft fracture. We included only those with an operative and non-operative cohort in adult patients. We undertook a meta-analysis of the following outcome measures: nonunion, malunion, delayed union, iatrogenic nerve injury and infection. Non-operative management was with a functional brace. Results Non-operative management resulted in a significantly higher nonunion rate of 17.6% compared to 6.3% with fixation. Operative management had a significantly higher iatrogenic nerve injury rate of 3.4% and infection rate of 3.7%. All nonunions within the included studies went on to union after plate fixation. There was no significant difference in delayed union or patient reported outcome measures. There was a significantly increased risk of malunion with non-operative treatment however this did not correlate with the outcome. Discussion Our findings suggest that in the majority of cases, humeral shaft fractures can be managed with non-operative treatment, and any subsequent nonunion should be treated with plate fixation.