Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access
Include Proceedings
Access
Journals
Abstracts
Dates
Year From
Year To
Specialties
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_14 | Pages 90 - 90
1 Dec 2019
OPERATING ROOM VENTILATION AND THE RISK OF REVISION DUE TO INFECTION AFTER TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: ASSESSMENT OF VALIDATED DATA IN THE NORWEGIAN ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER 2005–2015
Langvatn H Schrama JC Engesæter LB Hallan G Furnes O Lingaas E Walenkamp G Dale H
Full Access
View article

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of the true operating room (OR) ventilation on the risk of revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR).

Method

40 orthopedic units were included during the period 2005 – 2015. The Unidirectional airflow (UDAF) systems were subdivided into small-area, low-volume, vertical UDAF (lvUDAF) (volume flow rate (VFR) (m3/hour) <=10,000 and diffuser array size (DAS) (m2) <=10); large-area, high-volume, vertical UDAF (hvUDAF) (VFR >=10,000 and DAS >=10) and Horizontal UDAF (H-UDAF). The systems were compared to conventional, turbulent ventilation (CV) systems. The association between revision due to infection and OR ventilation was assessed using Cox regression models, with adjustments for sex, age, indication for surgery, ASA-classification, method of fixation, modularity of the components, duration of surgery, in addition to year of primary THA. All included THAs received systemic, antibiotic prophylaxis.

Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_23 | Pages 50 - 50
1 Dec 2016
TREATMENT OF INFECTION AFTER PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY IN A UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
Lutro O Dale H Sjursen H Schrama JC Høvding P Bartz-Johannessen CA Hallan G Engesæter LB
Full Access
View article

Aim

To see what surgical strategy was used in treating infected total hip arthroplasties (THA), relative to bacterial findings, level of inflammation, length of antibiotic treatment (AB) and re-revisions. Further, to assess the results of treatment after three months and one year.

Method

We used our national arthroplasty register (NAR) to identify THA revised for deep infection from 2004–2015 reported from our hospital. We identified the strategy of revision, i.e. one-stage exchange (one-stage), two-stage exchange (two-stage), debridement and implant retention (DAIR), or Girdlestone, and reported re-revisions for infection. We defined cure as no AB, no need for further surgery and joint with prosthesis (not Girdlestone).

From the hospitals’ medical records we retrieved bacterial findings from the revisions, level of C-reactive protein (CRP), type of antibiotics given, duration of antibiotic therapy and clinical data regarding the patients. The information reported to the NAR was also validated.

Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_23 | Pages 87 - 87
1 Dec 2016
OPERATING ROOM VENTILATION AND RISK OF REVISION DUE TO INFECTION AFTER PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY
Langvatn H Schrama JC Engesæter LB Lingaas E Dale H
Full Access
View article

Aim

The aim of this study was to validate the information on operating room ventilation reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) and to assess the influence of this ventilation on the risk of revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Method

Current and previous ventilation systems were evaluated together with the hospitals head engineer in 40 orthopaedic hospitals. The ventilation system of each operating room was assessed and confirmed as either conventional ventilation, vertical laminar airflow (LAF) or horizontal LAF. We then identified cases of first revision due to deep infection after primary THA and the type of ventilation system reported to the NAR in the period 1987–2014. The association between revision due to infection and operating room ventilation was estimated by relative risks (RR) in a Cox regression model.

Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 334 - 334
1 Jul 2011
S11.3 RISK OF REVISION FOR INFECTION AFTER PRIMARY TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS. A COMPARISON OF PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS AND PRIMARY OSTEOARTHRITIS FROM THE NORWEGIAN ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER
Schrama JC Espehaug B Hallan G Engesaeter LB Fevang BT
Full Access
View article

Objectives: The major objective of the present study was to investigate the risk of revision of infection after primary total knee replacements (TKR) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) during a 13-year period. We wished to compare RA patients with OA patients in order to detect differences in the risk of revision for infection, and to compare changes in the risk for the two patient groups over time. Furthermore we studied the time from primary implantation to revision for infection in the two groups.

Patients and Methods: From January 1994 to June 2008, 2482 primary TKRs in patients with RA and 25189 in OA patients were identified in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Kaplan-Meier survival curves, with revision for infection as the endpoint, were constructed. Cox regression analyses were performed to calculate relative risk (RR) of revision for infection according to diagnosis, age, gender, year of surgery (from 1994 through 2000 and from 2001 to June 2008) and time of revision related to the time of primary TKR. All relative risks were adjusted for the other variables.

Results: The 5-year revision rate for infection of TKR was 1.1% in RA patients and 0.5% in OA patients. Rheumatoid arthritis patients had a 1.7 (95%CI 1.2–2.6) times higher risk of revision for infection compared to the control group (OA patients). The patients who had TKR surgery in the later period had a decreased risk of revision for infection (RR 0.72, 95%CI 0.53–0.98) compared to the time period 1994–2000. Furthermore, the risk of revision for late infection in RA patients, increased compared to OA from 4 years after the index operation.

Conclusion: Patients with RA undergoing total knee replacement surgery were at a higher risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection and had a higher risk of late infections leading to revision, than patients with OA. These findings emphasizes the importance of preoperative management and optimizing preventive strategies, especially in this patient group.

Image linking to Orthomedia