The demands placed upon joint surgeons are perhaps greatest when treating the revision arthroplasty patient, who present with complications demanding skill in diagnosis and evaluation, interpersonal communication and the technical aspects of the revision procedure. However, little information exists identifying which specific tasks in revision arthroplasty are most difficult for surgeons to master, and whether the greatest challenges arise from clinical, cognitive or technical facets of patient treatment. This study was undertaken to identify which tasks associated with revision total knee replacement (TKR) are perceived as most challenging to young surgeons and trainees to guide future efforts in surgical training and curriculum development. We developed an online survey instrument consisting of 69 items encompassing pre-operative, intraoperative, and post-operative tasks that preliminary studies identified as the essential components of revision TKR. These tasks encompassed 4 domains: clinical decision-making skills (n=9), interpersonal assessment and communication (n=7), surgical decision-making (n=35) and procedural surgical tasks (n=18). Respondents rated the difficulty of each item on a 5-level Likert scale, with an ordinal score ranging from 1 (“very easy”) to 5 (“very difficult”. The survey instrument was administered to a cohort of 109 US surgeons: 31 trainees enrolled in a joint fellowship program (Fellows) and 78 surgeons who had graduated from a joint fellowship program within the previous 10 years (Joint Surgeons). Using appropriate parametric and non-parametric tests, the responses were analyzed to examine the variation of reported difficulty of each of the 69 items, in addition to the nature of the task (cognitive, surgical, clinical and interpersonal), and differences between Fellows and Surgeons.Introduction
Methods
Periprosthetic infection (PPI) remains the most dreaded and difficult complication of total joint arthroplasty. Although there is no definite diagnostic test for PPI, synovial leukocyte count and neutrophil percentage have been reported to have high sensitivity and specificity. However, leukocytes and neutrophils introduced into the joint during a traumatic aspiration can skew results and undermine the predictive value of this diagnostic test. This study intends to determine the diagnostic value of implementing a corrective formula frequently used in traumatic spinal taps to adjust for serum leukocytes introduced into the joint fluid during a bloody tap. We conducted a review of all TKA aspirations of infected and non-infected patients performed at our institute from 2000 to 2005. The following inclusion criteria were used:
(a) a red cell count (RBC) was performed on the aspirate, and (b) a blood white cell count with differential was done within one week of aspiration. Patients with inflammatory arthropathy or those who underwent reimplantation after PPI were excluded. Strict criteria for diagnosis of PPI were used. We previously determined at our institute the cut-off values for fluid leukocyte count (>
1760 cells/μl) and neutrophil percentage (>
73%). The adjusted fluid leukocyte counts were calculated using the following formula: Wadjusted = WBCobserved – [(WBCblood * RBC-fluid/RBCblood)] predicted. A similar formula was implemented to calculate the adjusted absolute neutrophil counts. Our cohort included 73 infected and 32 aseptic total knee arthroplasties that fulfilled the above criteria. After correcting for introduced red blood cells, cell counts of 3 infected patients dropped below the cut-off value, while the remaining 70 maintained a high cell count. However, the 3 infected patients had initial cell counts below our reported cut-offs. Of the 32 non-infected patients, 10 patients had false positive cell counts due to the presence of extremely high numbers of blood RBC. Five of the 10 false positive aspirates successfully corrected to levels below the thresholds used to diagnose infection. The aspirates that corrected had a greater number of introduced RBCs, an initial higher cell count, and 20 times more fluid WBC deducted from the initial cell count. The corrective formula can safely adjust for RBC found in a traumatic tap and detect false positive results among non-infected TKA without compromising the diagnosis of infection. Adjusted aspirates of non-infected TKA can be expected to decrease below zero due to one of the following: adherence of the introduced systemic WBC to the joint synovium, greater rate of lysis of the introduced systemic WBC compared to the systemic RBC, laboratory errors in performing fluid cell counts.
Periprosthetic infection (PPI) is one of the most devastating complications of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It is widely accepted that resection arthroplasty supplemented with intravenous antibiotics and delayed exchange arthroplasty is the treatment modality of choice for infected TKA. However, the outcome after reimplantation has varied and unpredictable results have been reported. This study evaluates the outcome of this treatment strategy in a single high volume specialised center. Furthermore, our study aims to identify the factors that lead to failure of this treatment. A thorough review of our joint registry database revealed that 80 patients with an infected TKA underwent resection arthroplasty at our institution during 2000–2005. Sixty-five patients underwent two-stage exchange arthroplasty while the remaining 15 failed to have the second stage reimplantation due to ill health or underwent arthrodesis or amputation. The latter 15 were excluded from the analysis. All patients were followed up prospectively for at least two years. Detailed data including demographics, comorbidities, surgical history, and medication intake was collected. Intraoperative data, organism profile, and complications were also documented. Failure was defined as patient requiring additional surgical procedure for control of infection or loosening. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty successfully eradicated infection in 45 patients (31%) without need for further treatment. Twelve patients (18%) had recurrent infection that necessitated another resection arthroplasty. Eleven (17%) patients required irrigation and debridement for postoperative purulent drainage which successfully treated infection in 5 cases (46%). The remaining 6 patients failed and required resection arthroplasty. Three additional patients had early loosening of components and required revision arthroplasty. The exact cause of loosening in these patients could not be determined, and despite lack of isolation of organisms infection was suspected. Our analysis identified that irrigation and debridement prior to resection arthroplasty are major risk factors for failure. Current strategies to treat periprosthetic infection remain imperfect. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty with all its inherent problems and inconveniences imparted a modest success in treatment of PPI at our high volume specialised center. The rise in the number of resistant and virulent organisms, increase in the number of patients with severe medical comorbidities who develop infection may account for the decline in the success of two-stage resection arthroplasty. Novel strategies for treatment of PPI are desperately needed.