Around 1% of total hip replacements are follow by prosthetic joint infection (PJI). There is uncertainty about best treatment method for PJI, and the most recent high quality systematic reviews in unselected patients indicates that re-infection rates following one-stage and
Joint replacement is a highly effective intervention to treat osteoarthritis of the hip, relieving pain and improving mobility and quality of life.(1) Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after arthroplasty. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention are treatment of first choice in case of early infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA).(2) In case of persisting infection, one- or two-stage revision needs to be performed.(3) The use of different kinds of spacers has been widely debated in the past years.(4) The aim of this study was to determine which type of spacer should be used during the interval of two-stage revision of an infected THA. A search term with Boolean operators was constructed. We extracted all information regarding study and patient characteristics and baseline clinical and laboratory findings. Data regarding type of spacer and antibiotics used, timing of second stage surgery, tissue culture results, postoperative regimen, functional outcome and patient satisfaction were extracted. A total of twenty-six studies met our inclusion criteria and were included for data analysis. Ten studies described various preformed spacers, six studies described functional spacers and eleven studies described custom made spacers. See Table 1 for results. Research should focus on finding the preferred type of treatment and type of spacer to combine a high success rate of infection treatment with a good functional and patient reported outcome. There is a need for a prospective study evaluating patient satisfaction and functional outcome after two-stage revision THA comparing various spacers. Secondly, research should focus on the optimal timing of the second stage procedure. Functional spacers achieve a comparable rate of infection eradication in the treatment of periprosthetic hip joint infections as compared to preformed spacers. There is insufficient evidence concerning rehabilitation and functional outcome after two-stage revisionTHA to advocate or discourage the use of either kind of interval spacer.
Aims. Treatment outcomes for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) using systemic vancomycin and antibacterial cement spacers during
Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is an uncommon but serious complication of hip replacement. Over 1,000 operations are performed annually in the United Kingdom for PJI following hip replacement, using either one- or
Aim. Identification of the causal pathogen is crucial in the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip. Unfortunately, it was often difficult and negative culture could be a common findings. This situation made the treatment of PJI of the hip became more challenging. The negative culture finding resulted in a doubtful diagnosis of infection, and poses difficulty in choosing the appropriate antibiotics. Here we compared the treatment outcome of
Introduction: The current gold standard for the treatment of the infected total knee arthroplasty is a two-stage revision. The purpose of this study is to present our results with
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenging complication following Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). It is associated with high levels of morbidity, mortality and is time consuming and expensive to treat. Our management generally relies on identification of the infecting organism(s) in order to define the appropriate treatment strategy. Patients with culture-negative PJI poses a greater challenge to surgeons and to the wider multidisciplinary team. This study compares the outcomes of 50 consecutive complex culture-positive (deemed unsuitable for single stage exchange) and 50 culture-negative THAs managed with
INTRO.
Deep infection following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a devastating complication for the patient and a costly one for patients, surgeons, hospitals and payers. The aim of this study is to compare revision TKA for infection, revision TKA for aseptic loosening and primary TKA with respect to their impact on hospital and surgeon resource utilisation. The evaluation of hospital cost was carried out on a microeconomic basis in order to best evaluate the true cost. Demographic, clinical and economic data were obtained for 25 consecutive patients with an infection after TKA who underwent a
Antibiotic-loaded PMMA spacers are used with increased frequency in
In recent years articulating cement spacers have been used to treat infected knee arthroplasty. The aim has been to better maintain tissue planes and joint mobility thereby improving second stage re-implantation surgery. Two groups of patients treated for infected knee arthroplasty were reviewed. Twenty-six patients with articulating and forty patients with static antibiotic-impregnated methyl-methacrylate spacers were compared. The articulating spacers demonstrated easier surgical exposure at second stage and improved range of knee motion after re-implantation. There was no compromise in the rate of infection eradication with articulating spacers. Bone loss at revision was independent of spacer type. To compare the results of patients treated with articulating versus static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for infected knee arthroplasty. Articulating cement spacers facilitate re-implantation surgery by maintaining tissue planes and joint mobility without compromising joint stability or eradication rate of infection. Patients demonstrate better range of motion and less complications related to the extensor mechanism with the articulated spacer. Antibiotic impregnated methyl-methacrylate spacers have become a mainstay in
In recent years articulating cement spacers have been used to treat infected knee arthroplasty. The aim has been to better maintain tissue planes and joint mobility thereby improving second stage re-implantation surgery. Two groups of patients treated for infected knee arthroplasty were reviewed. Twenty-six patients with articulating and forty patients with static antibiotic-impregnated methyl-methacrylate spacers were compared. The articulating spacers demonstrated easier surgical exposure at second stage and improved range of knee motion after re-implantation. There was no compromise in the rate of infection eradication with articulating spacers. Bone loss at revision was independent of spacer type. To compare the results of patients treated with articulating versus static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for infected knee arthroplasty. Articulating cement spacers facilitate re-implantation surgery by maintaining tissue planes and joint mobility without compromising joint stability or eradication rate of infection. Patients demonstrate better range of motion and less complications related to the extensor mechanism with the articulated spacer. Antibiotic impregnated methyl-methacrylate spacers have become a mainstay in
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes, mortalities, implant survival rates, and complications of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with or without hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection over at least ten years of follow-up. From January 2008 to December 2010, 266 TKAs were performed in 169 patients with HBV (HBV group). A total of 169 propensity score–matched patients without HBV were chosen for the control group in a one-to-one ratio. Then, the clinical outcomes, mortalities, implant survival rates, and complications of TKA in the two groups were compared. The mean follow-up periods were 11.7 years (10.5 to 13.4) in the HBV group and 11.8 years (11.5 to 12.4) in the control group.Aims
Methods
Achievement of accurate microbiological diagnosis prior to revision is key to reducing the high rates of persistent infection after revision knee surgery. The effect of change in the microorganism between the first- and second-stage revision of total knee arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) on the success of management is not clear. A two-centre retrospective cohort study was conducted to review the outcome of patients who have undergone two-stage revision for treatment of knee arthroplasty PJI, focusing specifically on isolated micro-organisms at both the first- and second-stage procedure. Patient demographics, medical, and orthopaedic history data, including postoperative outcomes and subsequent treatment, were obtained from the electronic records and medical notes.Aims
Methods
We aimed to evaluate the utility of 68Ga-citrate positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in the differentiation of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and aseptic loosening (AL), and compare it with 99mTc-methylene bisphosphonates (99mTc-MDP) bone scan. We studied 39 patients with suspected PJI or AL. These patients underwent 68Ga-citrate PET/CT, 99mTc-MDP three-phase bone scan and single-photon emission CT (SPECT)/CT. PET/CT was performed at ten minutes and 60 minutes after injection, respectively. Images were evaluated by three nuclear medicine doctors based on: 1) visual analysis of the three methods based on tracer uptake model, and PET images attenuation-corrected with CT and those not attenuation-corrected with CT were analyzed, respectively; and 2) semi-quantitative analysis of PET/CT: maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of lesions, SUVmax of the lesion/SUVmean of the normal bone, and SUVmax of the lesion/SUVmean of the normal muscle. The final diagnosis was based on the clinical and intraoperative findings, and histopathological and microbiological examinations.Aims
Methods
Periprosthetic hip and knee infection remains one of the most severe complications following arthroplasty, with an incidence between 0.5% to 1%. This study compares the outcomes of revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following hip and knee arthroplasty prior to and after implementation of a specialist PJI multidisciplinary team (MDT). Data was retrospectively analyzed from a single centre. In all, 29 consecutive joints prior to the implementation of an infection MDT in November 2016 were compared with 29 consecutive joints subsequent to the MDT conception. All individuals who underwent a debridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedure, a one-stage revision, or a two-stage revision for an acute or chronic PJI in this time period were included. The definition of successfully treated PJI was based on the Delphi international multidisciplinary consensus.Aims
Methods
Despite of improved operative technique, ultra-clean air in the operating theater and systemically administered as well as in bone cement loaded antibiotics, septic complications after replacement arthroplasty of the knee still exist. Depending of the follow-up time in different reported series insidence vary from 0.5 to 5 per cent. Classic clinical symptoms, painful, swollen knee joint, possibly fever, indicate to more accurate examinations. Lesson to learn: . No treatment before adequate diagnosis !. No “homeostatic” antibiotics before accurate examinations. If the very first contact with physician or surgeon happens in such conditions, that adequate diagnostic methods are not available, patient has to be referred to hospital or institution with capable facilities. Prosthetic infection can be classified in many ways. The following classification is useful for the treatment purposes. Classification of infection:. 1. Early postoperative infection less than 4 weeks after surgery. superficial. deep. extensive soft tissue defects due to skin necrosis. 2. Originally patient is operated for aseptic loosening, but intraoperative cultures are positive. 3. Late chronic infection. 4. Acute hematogenous infection. Diagnostic methods:. 1. Clinical examination:. - symptoms can be suppressed by painkillers or immunomodulant drugs. - wound healing problems. - sinuses. - swelling, redness. - pain. - temperature increased. 2. Blood chemistry:. ESR, C-reactive protein and blood white cell count/ differentiation are helpful. Be ware if the patient has such a general disease, which increases fex CRP. 3. Routine x-rays. In early cases no significant signs, in late cases might appear erosions or cysts. 4. Isotope scintigraphy. Technetium- or indium labeled leucosytes are given intravenously. The patient is scanned 24 hours. Extended scintigraphy seems to be more sensitive than routine 6 to 8 hours‘ scintigraphy. 5. Joint aspiration. One has to sure, that the patient is not on antibiotics. If she/he is, antibiotics has to be stopped for two to four weeks, and aspiration performed after that, unless infection is not clinically obvious or situation is not life-threatening. White cell count/differentiation can be for some help. When the cell count is less than 2000/ml, and majority of cells are mononuclear, the result is indicative negative for infection. White cell count over 10000/ml, and majority polymorphonuclear, speaks for infection. When the aspiration has been carried in aseptic condition, positive culture is strong evidence for infection. Adequate handling of sample is important: as little as possible air in the syringe and as short as possible time used for transportation to lab. Treatment protocols. Treatment protocols can rather straight forward: if any sample culture is positive,.
The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is difficult and requires a battery of tests and clinical findings. The purpose of this review is to summarize all current evidence for common and new serum biomarkers utilized in the diagnosis of PJI. We searched two literature databases, using terms that encompass all hip and knee arthroplasty procedures, as well as PJI and statistical terms reflecting diagnostic parameters. The findings are summarized as a narrative review.Objectives
Methods