Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 11 of 11
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 56 - 56
10 Feb 2023
Vaotuua D O'Connor P Belford M Lewis P Hatton A McAuliffe M
Full Access

Deep infection is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship between surgeon volume and the incidence of revision for infection after primary TKA.

Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from 1 September 1999 to 31 December 2020 for primary TKA for osteoarthritis that were revised for infection. Surgeon volume was defined by the number of primary TKA procedures performed by the surgeon in the year the primary TKA was performed and grouped as <25, 25-49, 50-74, 75-99, >100 primary TKA procedures per year. Kaplan Meir estimates for cumulative percent revision (CPR) and Cox Proportional Hazard Ratios were performed to compare rates of revision for infection by surgeon volume, with sub-analyses for patella and polyethylene use, age <65 years and male gender.

5295 of 602,919 primary TKA for osteoarthritis were revised for infection. High volume surgeons (>100 TKA/year) had a significantly lower rate of revision for infection with a CPR at 1 and 17 years of 0.4% (95% CI 0.3, 0.4) and 1.5% (95% CI 1.2, 2.0), respectively, compared with 0.6% (95% CI 0.5, 0.7) and 2.1% (95% CI 1.8, 2.3), respectively, for low volume surgeons (<25 TKR/year). Differences between the high-volume group and the remaining groups remained when sub-analysis for age, gender, ASA, BMI, patella resurfacing and the use of cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE).

High volume surgeons have lower rates of revision for infection in primary TKA.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXIII | Pages 87 - 87
1 May 2012
Howie D Solomon L Shaw D Pannach S
Full Access

The purpose of this paper is to review the early results of Prostalac system under licence from Therapeutic Goods Administration for Professor Howie in the management of two stage exchange hip arthroplasty for infection (restricted to Royal Adelaide Hospital) and the addition of vancomycin and teicoplanin powder to tobramycin cement without additional tobramycin. Thirteen patients were treated for an infected THR with the Prostalac system. Preoperative and intra-operative cultures were taken to identify the infective organisms. Vancomycin 3 gm was added to the Prostalac cement mantle per 40 gm packet of antibiotic bone cement containing tobramycin 1 gm. Teicoplanin 2.4 gm was used in one case where the patient had a known vancomycin allergy. Postoperatively patients underwent six weeks of IV antibiotics followed by four to six weeks of oral. A short term successful clinical outcome was determined by implantation of a total hip prosthesis at the time of second stage operation and no reoperations resulting from recurrent infection and off antibiotics for â□¥ 6 months with normal clinical and CRP lab values. Thirteen patients received the Prostalac system. No patient was lost to follow-up. Nine have progressed to second stage revision, eight of which had femoral impaction grafting. Two deaths occurred not attributed to the Prostalac system. Three superficial wound infections and two required washout and debridement. One Prostalac stem subsidence. There has been no recurrence of deep joint infection. Retention of the second stage prosthesis has been 100% at 17 months. The PROSTALAC system with the addition of vancomycin or teicoplanin to the tobramycin antibiotic cement has encouraging short-term results for treatment of deep joint infection. Complication rate has been well within the range reported in literature. Successful early outcomes are encouraging with all patients in the Prostalac study having retained their permanent hip prosthesis following second stage surgery


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXIV | Pages 36 - 36
1 Jul 2012
Fernandez M Karthikeyan S Wyse M Foguet P
Full Access

Urinary catheterization in the postoperative period is known to increase the risk of deep joint infection following arthroplasty. A number of studies have attempted to elucidate the individual patient factors and surgical procedural factors which predispose patients to postoperative urinary retention. We conducted a retrospective observational study of three hundred patients to specifically determine the effect of the anaesthetic technique on the incidence of urinary retention following elective lower limb arthroplasty. One hundred consecutive patients were surveyed in each of three groups differing by the type of the anaesthetic technique and the drug administered; 1) general anaesthesia with femoral nerve block, 2) spinal anaesthesia with intrathecal fentanyl, and 3) spinal anaesthesia with intrathecal morphine. The incidence of urinary retention requiring catheterisation in male patients receiving intrathecal morphine was 58% compared with 10% and 6% for those who had general anaesthesia with femoral nerve block and intrathecal fentanyl, respectively. This difference was statistically significant (p<0.01). The incidence of urinary retention in females across all groups was =2%. The average residual volume of urine following catheterisation was 750ml (460-1500ml). Our findings show that the use of intrathecal morphine greatly increases the risk of postoperative urinary retention in male patients, whereas no significant increase was found amongst female patients. This risk should be carefully considered when choosing the type of intraoperative anaesthetic/analgesic combination employed in male patients and be rationalised against the intended benefits to the patient


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XLI | Pages 69 - 69
1 Sep 2012
McDougall CJ Gray HS Simpson PM Whitehouse SL Crawford R Donnelly W
Full Access

Bleeding related wound complications including deep infection, superficial infection and haematoma cause significant morbidity in lower limb joint arthroplasty surgery. It has been observed anecdotally that patients requiring therapeutic anti-coagulation within the peri-operative period have higher rates of bleeding related complications and those requiring intravenous heparin particularly appear to do poorly. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between post-operative bleeding and wound complications in the patient requiring therapeutic warfarin, plus or minus heparin, in total hip arthroplasty surgery. This is a retrospective cohort study reviewing 1047 primary total hip replacements performed in a single centre over a five year period and comparing outcomes of the patients on warfarin (89) with a double-matched control group of patients not on warfarin (179). Outcomes included rates of deep infection, excessive wound ooze or haematoma, superficial infection, return to OT for washout and need for revision operation. The study group was then sub analysed comparing those on IV heparin plus oral warfarin, to those on warfarin alone. The warfarin group had significantly higher risk of deep joint infection (9% vs 2.2% p= 0.023), haematoma/wound ooze (28% vs 4% p < 0.001) and superficial infection (13.5% vs 2.2% p < 0.001) compared to the control group. In the sub analysis of the study group, those on IV heparin had significantly higher risk of haematoma/wound ooze (44% vs 28% p= 0.023) than those on warfarin alone. The requirement of therapeutic anti-coagulation in the peri-operative period is a tenuous balance between the complications of thrombo-embolic disease and bleeding-related morbidity. In the past, perhaps the full burden of bleeding related complications has not been appreciated, but now improved understanding will enable the both the surgeon and the patient to make more informed decisions regarding therapeutic anticoagulation in elective arthroplasty surgery


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 6 - 6
1 Feb 2012
Amin A Clayton R Patton J Gaston M Cook R Brenkel I
Full Access

Aim. To compare the results of total knee replacement in a consecutive series of morbidly obese patients (body mass index (BMI) > 40 kg/m. 2. ) with a matched group of non-obese (BMI< 30 kg/m. 2. ) patients. Methods. 41 consecutive total knee replacements performed in morbidly obese patients were matched pre-operatively with 41 total knee replacements performed in non-obese patients for age, sex, diagnosis, type of prosthesis, laterality, knee score and function score components of the Knee Society Score (KSS). All patients were prospectively followed up and the post-operative KSS, radiographs, complications (superficial wound infection, deep joint infection, deep venous thrombosis, peri-operative mortality) and five-year survivorship compared for the two groups. No patients were lost to follow-up (mean follow-up in morbidly obese: 38.5 (range 6-66) months; non-obese: 44 (range 6-67) months). Results. The mean knee score was inferior in the morbidly obese group compared to the non-obese group, but the difference only approached significance (p=0.08). The mean function score was significantly inferior in the morbidly obese group compared to the non-obese group (p=0.01). Total knee replacements performed in morbidly obese patients were associated with a significantly higher incidence of radiolucent lines on post-operative radiographs (29% vs. 7%, p=0.02) and a significantly higher complication rate (32% vs. 0%, p=0.001). The five-year survivorship based on revision and pain as endpoints was 72.3% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 52.1%-92.5%) for the morbidly obese group compared to 97.6% (95% CI 92.9%-100%) for the non-obese group (log-rank test, p = 0.02). Conclusion. In a subgroup of obese patients who are morbidly obese, the results of total knee replacement are poor. These patients should be advised to lose weight prior to surgery or be warned of the inferior results before proceeding with surgery


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 100-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 93 - 93
1 Jun 2018
Pagnano M
Full Access

Deep peri-prosthetic infection after partial or total knee arthroplasty is a disconcerting problem for patient and surgeon alike. The diagnosis of infection is sometimes obvious but frequently requires that the surgeon maintain a substantial index of suspicion for infection as the cause of pain or poor outcome after any joint arthroplasty. While surgical debridement with component retention is appropriate in a subgroup of patients with an acute peri-prosthetic infection, most delayed and chronic infections are best treated with component resection. With carefully selected patients and very aggressive debridement protocols some success has been demonstrated in Europe with single-stage exchange for infection. Most surgeons in North America, however, are unfamiliar with the very aggressive debridement techniques employed at European centers that promote single stage replant; and few surgeons in North America are currently comfortable in cementing a hinged total knee replacement in place for the typical infected TKA nor do they have the patience to re-prep and drape with an entirely new OR setup after debridement and prior to the insertion of the new implant − 2 steps that are often mentioned as important to the success of single stage exchange. The pre-eminent role of two-stage exchange as the definitive treatment was established over 30 years ago. Two-stage exchange remains the gold-standard in treatment with an established track record from multiple centers and with multiple different types of infecting organisms. Some of the historical problems with two-stage exchange, such as limited mobility during the interval stage, have been mitigated with the development of effective articulating spacer techniques. Further, the emergence of drug resistant bacteria and the possibility of fungal infection make two-stage exchange the best choice for the majority of patients with deep periprosthetic joint infection in 2017


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 97-B, Issue SUPP_13 | Pages 60 - 60
1 Nov 2015
Pagnano M
Full Access

Deep periprosthetic infection after hip or knee arthroplasty is a disconcerting problem for patient and surgeon alike. The diagnosis of infection is sometimes obvious but frequently requires that the surgeon maintain a substantial index of suspicion for infection as the cause of pain or poor outcome after any joint arthroplasty. While surgical debridement with component retention is appropriate in a subgroup of patients with an acute periprosthetic infection most delayed and chronic infections are best treated with component resection. The pre-eminent role of two-stage exchange as the definitive treatment was established over 30 years ago. Two-stage exchange remains the gold-standard in treatment with an established track record from multiple centers and with multiple different types of infecting organisms. Some of the historical problems with two-stage exchange, such as limited mobility during the interval stage, have been mitigated with the development of effective articulating spacer techniques. Further, the emergence of drug resistant bacteria and the possibility of fungal infection make two-stage exchange the best choice for the majority of patients with deep periprosthetic joint infection in 2015


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_23 | Pages 12 - 12
1 Dec 2016
Holleyman R Khan S Marsh M Tyas B Kalson N Baker P Martin K Inman D Oswald T Reed M
Full Access

Aim. This study aimed to identify risk factors for development of deep periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients following surgical treatment of neck of femur fracture. Method. This study identified a consecutive series of 2,822 (2,052 female, 73%) patients who underwent either hemiarthroplasty (n=1,825, 65%) or fixation (DHS) (n=997, 35%) for fractured neck of femur performed between January 2009 and June 2015 at our institution. Full patient demographics, co-morbidity and peri-operative complication data were determined. The majority of patients were either ASA 2 (n=663, 23%) or ASA 3 (n=1,521, 54%), mean age = 81.3 years (SD 10.3). All patients were followed up post-operatively by a dedicated surgical site infection (SSI) monitoring team in order to identify patients who developed a PJI within 1 year. A stepwise multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify patient and surgical factors associated with increased risk of infection. Predictors with a p-value of <0.20 in the univariate analysis were included in the multivariate analysis. Results. Thirty-nine (39) cases of deep periprosthetic infection were identified (hemiarthroplasty n=35, DHS n=4) representing an overall deep infection rate of 1.4% (hemiarthroplasty 1.9%, DHS 0.4%). The most common infecting pathogen was a pure growth of coagulase negative Staphylococcus (n=9, 23%) followed by a pure growth of Staphylococcus aureus (n=7, 18%). An increased risk of PJI was observed in patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty compared to those treated by fixation (odds ratio (OR) 6.50, 95%CI 2.26 – 18.7, p=0.001). Of patient factors, only blood transfusion within 30 days (OR 3.51, 95%CI 1.72 – 7.13, p=0.001) and the presence or development of pressure sores on or during admission (OR 2.99, 95%CI 1.24 – 7.19, p=0.015) were significantly associated with an increased risk of development of PJI. Use of high-dose dual antibiotic cement (gentamicin and clindamycin) was associated with a two-fold reduction in the risk of PJI (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.20 – 0.76, p=0.005) vs standard dose gentamicin antibiotic cement. Conclusions. This study found: 1) a deep infection rate similar to that reported earlier from large number studies from the UK, 2) a six-fold higher deep infection rate in hemiarthroplasties, compared to internal fixations, and 3) a three-fold higher infection rate in patients who suffer concomitant pressure sores or receive a blood transfusion up to 30 days post-operatively


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 72 - 72
1 May 2016
Carroll K Levack A Schnaser E Potter H Cross M
Full Access

Introduction. The current recommendation by the AAOS in the 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the use of MRI to diagnose a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is “inconclusive” given the lack of evidence to support its use. The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of MRI with metal reduction artifact sequencing in diagnosing a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. 176 patients who underwent MRI with multi-acquisition variable resonance image combination (MAVRIC) to reduce metal artifact for a painful THA between the years of 2009–2013 were retrospectively evaluated. All MRIs were read by one of four radiologists with extensive experience in interpreting MRIs after THA. All MRIs were performed using a 1.5 Tesla magnet. Of the 176 patients examined, 16 patients were found to have a deep periprosthetic joint infection using Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria after the MRI was performed. MRI reads were classified as either positive (read as “evidence of active infection” or “suspicious for infection”) or negative (read as no evidence of infection). Only one patient who had a positive MRI read was excluded because of loss to followup after the MRI was performed. Results. Of the 160 aseptic patients, only one patient was read as suspicious for infection (false positive rate = 0.6%, specificity=99.4%, negative predictive value (NPV)=98.8%). Of the 16 patients with an infected THA, 14 patients were read as positive for infection (false negative rate=12.5%, sensitivity = 87.5%, positive predictive value (PPV)=93%). Conclusion. MRI with metal reduction artifact sequence is a highly specific test to diagnose or rule out a PJI with a low false positive rate and excellent PPV and NPV however, given its lower sensitivity than published for the serum C-reactive protein, is not recommended as a general “screening” test for all patients with pain after THA to rule out infection


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 31 - 31
1 Jan 2016
Carroll K Schnaser E Potter H Cross MB
Full Access

Introduction. The current recommendation by the AAOS in the 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the use of MRI to diagnose a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is “inconclusive” given the lack of evidence to support its use. The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of MRI with metal reduction artifact sequencing in diagnosing a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. 176 patients who underwent MRI with multi-acquisition variable resonance image combination (MAVRIC) to reduce metal artifact for a painful THA between the years of 2009–2013 were retrospectively evaluated. All MRIs were read by one of four radiologists with extensive experience in interpreting MRIs after THA. All MRIs were performed using a 1.5 Tesla magnet. Of the 176 patients examined, 16 patients were found to have a deep periprosthetic joint infection using Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria after the MRI was performed. MRI reads were classified as either positive (read as “evidence of active infection” or “suspicious for infection”) or negative (read as no evidence of infection). Only one patient who had a positive MRI read was excluded because of loss to followup after the MRI was performed. Results. Of the 160 aseptic patients, only one patient was read as suspicious for infection (false positive rate = 0.6%, specificity=99.4%, negative predictive value (NPV)=98.8%). Of the 16 patients with an infected THA, 14 patients were read as positive for infection (false negative rate=12.5%, sensitivity = 87.5%, positive predictive value (PPV)=93%). Conclusion. MRI with metal reduction artifact sequence is a highly specific test to diagnose or rule out a PJI with a low false positive rate and excellent PPV and NPV however, given its lower sensitivity than published for the serum C-reactive protein, is not recommended as a general “screening” test for all patients with pain after THA to rule out infection


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 88-B, Issue 6 | Pages 812 - 817
1 Jun 2006
Nixon M Jackson B Varghese P Jenkins D Taylor G

We examined the rates of infection and colonisation by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) between January 2003 and May 2004 in order to assess the impact of the introduction of an MRSA policy in October 2003, which required all admissions to be screened. Emergency admissions were treated prophylactically and elective beds ring-fenced. A total of 5594 admissions were cross-referenced with 22 810 microbiology results. The morbidity, mortality and cost of managing MRSA-carrying patients, with a proximal fracture of the femur were compared, in relation to age, gender, American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade and residential status, with a group of matched controls who were MRSA-negative.

In 2004, we screened 1795 of 1796 elective admissions and MRSA was found in 23 (1.3%). We also screened 1122 of 1447 trauma admissions and 43 (3.8%) were carrying MRSA. All ten ward transfers were screened and four (40%) were carriers (all p < 0.001). The incidence of MRSA in trauma patients increased by 2.6% per week of inpatient stay (r = 0.97, p < 0.001). MRSA developed in 2.9% of trauma and 0.2% of elective patients during that admission (p < 0.001). The implementation of the MRSA policy reduced the incidence of MRSA infection by 56% in trauma patients (1.57% in 2003 (17 of 1084) to 0.69% in 2004 (10 of 1447), p = 0.035). Infection with MRSA in elective patients was reduced by 70% (0.56% in 2003 (7 of 1257) to 0.17% in 2004 (3 of 1806), p = 0.06). The cost of preventing one MRSA infection was £3200.

Although colonisation by MRSA did not affect the mortality rate, infection by MRSA more than doubled it. Patients with proximal fractures of the femur infected with MRSA remained in hospital for 50 extra days, had 19 more days of vancomycin treatment and 26 more days of vacuum-assisted closure therapy than the matched controls. These additional costs equated to £13 972 per patient.

From this experience we have been able to describe the epidemiology of MRSA, assess the impact of infection-control measures on MRSA infection rates and determine the morbidity, mortality and economic cost of MRSA carriage on trauma and elective orthopaedic wards.