Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 13, Issue 12 | Pages 695 - 702
1 Dec 2024
Cordero García-Galán E Medel-Plaza M Pozo-Kreilinger JJ Sarnago H Lucía Ó Rico-Nieto A Esteban J Gomez-Barrena E

Aims

Electromagnetic induction heating has demonstrated in vitro antibacterial efficacy over biofilms on metallic biomaterials, although no in vivo studies have been published. Assessment of side effects, including thermal necrosis of adjacent tissue, would determine transferability into clinical practice. Our goal was to assess bone necrosis and antibacterial efficacy of induction heating on biofilm-infected implants in an in vivo setting.

Methods

Titanium-aluminium-vanadium (Ti6Al4V) screws were implanted in medial condyle of New Zealand giant rabbit knee. Study intervention consisted of induction heating of the screw head up to 70°C for 3.5 minutes after implantation using a portable device. Both knees were implanted, and induction heating was applied unilaterally keeping contralateral knee as paired control. Sterile screws were implanted in six rabbits, while the other six received screws coated with Staphylococcus aureus biofilm. Sacrifice and sample collection were performed 24, 48, or 96 hours postoperatively. Retrieved screws were sonicated, and adhered bacteria were estimated via drop-plate. Width of bone necrosis in retrieved femora was assessed through microscopic examination. Analysis was performed using non-parametric tests with significance fixed at p ≤ 0.05.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 13, Issue 6 | Pages 306 - 314
19 Jun 2024
Wu B Su J Zhang Z Zeng J Fang X Li W Zhang W Huang Z

Aims

To explore the clinical efficacy of using two different types of articulating spacers in two-stage revision for chronic knee periprosthetic joint infection (kPJI).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of 50 chronic kPJI patients treated with two types of articulating spacers between January 2014 and March 2022 was conducted. The clinical outcomes and functional status of the different articulating spacers were compared. Overall, 17 patients were treated with prosthetic spacers (prosthetic group (PG)), and 33 patients were treated with cement spacers (cement group (CG)). The CG had a longer mean follow-up period (46.67 months (SD 26.61)) than the PG (24.82 months (SD 16.46); p = 0.001).


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 11, Issue 10 | Pages 690 - 699
4 Oct 2022
Lenguerrand E Whitehouse MR Kunutsor SK Beswick AD Baker RP Rolfson O Reed MR Blom AW

Aims

We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage revision surgery and single-stage revision surgery among patients with infected primary knee arthroplasty.

Methods

Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary knee arthroplasty, initially revised with a single-stage or a two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014, were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HR) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies.