Aims

The results of irrigation and debridement with component retention (IDCR) in the treatment of acutely infected total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) have been variable. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome after IDCR when combined with chronic antibiotic suppression. We also evaluated survivorship free from subsequent infection, removal of the components, and death, as well as the risk factors for failure.

Historical perspective: Irrigation and debridement (I&D) with modular exchange has historically been the recommended treatment for acute post-operative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), and acute hematogenous PJI. The theory supporting this practice was that because the bacterial glycocalyx had not yet formed by these early time points, by simply debriding the intra-articular bacterial load and exchanging the modular parts, one could potentially eradicate the infection, retain the prior components, and minimise morbidity to the patient. More recently, literature is coming out suggesting that this may not necessarily be the case. The vast majority of published research on the outcomes following I&D for treatment of PJI has focused on either cohorts of total knee arthroplasty patients or combined cohorts of total hip and knee patients. For this reason, it is difficult to tease out the differential success rate of periprosthetic hip vs. knee infections. Sherrell et al. performed a systematic review of the existing literature and created a table detailing the failure rates for various published articles on I&D for periprosthetic TKA infection. Since it is the glycocalyx that has been thought to be the reason for treatment failure of many cases of PJI treated with I&D, many authors have implicated staphylococcal species as a predictor of a negative outcome with failure rates ranging from 30–35%. Methicillin resistant organisms have been shown to be particularly difficult to eradicate with an isolated I&D, with a 72–84% failure rate at 2 year follow-up. Interestingly, a recent study by Odum et al. suggests that neither the infecting microbe, nor the antibiotic resistance profile of the organism, as has been classically thought, actually predicts success of I&D. Previous reports have indicated that the ability of I&D to control infection is related to the duration of symptoms and its timing relative to the index surgery. However, more recent literature is coming out to support the contrary. Koyonos et al. reviewed the outcomes of a series of 138 cases of PJI treated with I&D based on acuity of infection and concluded that an I&D has a limited role in controlling PJI regardless of acuity. Intuitively, the physical health of the host/patient should influence the success of I&D for treatment of PJI. Several authors have shown that an immunocompromised state is a predictor of treatment failure. Furthermore, Azzam et al. reported that patients with a higher American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) score, a proxy of severity of medical comorbidities, had a significantly higher failure rate. Although potentially appealing due to relative ease of execution and minimal surgical morbidity, the ability to successfully eradicate infection with an arthroscopic procedure may be compromised. Given the inability to perform a radical surgical debridement, nor exchange modular components, arthroscopic debridement should be used with extreme reservation in any case of PJI, regardless of the host, nature of the infecting organism, or acuity of infection. I&D as a conservative, less morbid alternative to two-stage exchange - There is a growing body of literature to suggest that an I&D with modular component exchange may not be the benign, less morbid alternative to the ‘gold standard’ two-stage exchange arthroplasty. In fact, Fehring et al. has reported that the success of a two-stage antibiotic spacer exchange arthroplasty may be compromised by an initial I&D. They found that patients who were initially treated with an I&D only had a 66% chance of eradicating infection following a two-stage exchange arthroplasty, in contrast to historical reports of 80–90% success

Introduction

Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR) remains the norm for the treatment of acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) despite less than optimal success rates. Intraosseous (IO) administration of vancomycin has been shown to have significantly increased local bone and tissue concentrations compared to systemic antibiotics, with lower systemic antibiotic levels compared to intravenous. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if the addition of IO regional antibiotics to our protocol at the time of DAIR would improve outcomes.

Introduction

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) for acute prosthetic hip infection is a popular low morbidity option despite less than optimal success rates. We theorized that the delay between DAIR and explantation in failed cases may complicate eradication due to biofilm maturation and entrenchment of bacteria in periprosthetic bone. We ask, what are the results of two-stage reimplantation after a failed DAIR versus an initial two-stage procedure?

Debridement of an infected total joint arthroplasty with retention of mechanically stable components is often performed for acute cases of periprosthetic infection (PPI). However, the reported success of such a procedure to fully eradicate infection has varied widely. The objective of this study was to elucidate the efficacy of debridement in both infected THA and TKA and attempt to identify risk factors responsible for failure.

During the years 2000–2005, 71 TKA and 69 THA underwent irrigation and debridement for acute PPI (< 4 weeks). 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.

Of the 140 patients, 24% required repeat irrigation and debridement for postoperative drainage, hema-toma formation, or systemic symptoms. One third of these revision debridement patients underwent multiple consecutive debridements. Two-stage resection arthroplasty was required in 65 patients (46%) of the entire cohort. Fifty-eight percent of the patients with resection required revision of their cement spacer block due to continuous drainage and systemic symptoms indicative of persistent infection. We noted a total of 86 failures (61%) that required either an additional debridement or resection arthroplasty after the first debridement procedure. The failure rates of THA (62%) and TKA (55%) individually were similar (p=0.253).

Although the concept of conservative management of PPI with debridement and retention of components is an attractive alternative to resection arthroplasty, we have found that 60% of patients undergoing this procedure will inevitably undergo two-stage arthroplasty. Furthermore, more than half of the patients that required resection arthroplasty developed infection of their spacer that entailed revision of the cement block. Therefore, we can conclude that this procedure has a high failure rate and should be implemented in only a select group of patients.

Infection following total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a devastating complication and is one of the main causes for revision surgery. This complication may be treated by irrigation and debridement with head and polyethylene exchange (IDHPE) or a two-stage revision (2SR). Previous studies have reported on the eradication success rates but few have reported patient outcome scores. The purpose of this study was to report patient outcome scores for both IDHPE and 2SR and compare these to a non-infected matched cohort. We hypothesised that both cohorts would have worse outcomes than the control group, and that those who failed an initial IDHPE and required a 2SR would have a worse outcome than those treated initially with a 2SR.

A retrospective review identified 137 patients from our institutional arthroplasty database who had an infected primary THA between 1986–2013. We excluded patients with less than one-year follow-up. Mean follow-up was 60 months (12–187 months). A control cohort was identified and matched according to age and Charlton Comorbidity Index (CCI). Harris Hip Scores, Short Form 12 and WOMAC scores were compared between our control group and our infected cohort.

Sixty-eight patients were treated with a 2SR and 69 patients were treated with an IDHPE. There was a 59% success rate in eradicating the infection with an IDHPE. All of the 28 patients who failed an IDHPE later went on to a 2SR. Outcome scores for the 2SR cohort were significantly worse than the non-infected controls (p0.05). There was no difference in outcome scores when comparing our 2SR cohort to our failed IDHPE (p>0.05).

Previous studies have focused on eradication rates. However, it is important to consider patient outcome scores when deciding the best treatment. Infected patients treated with a successful IDHPE had similar outcomes to non-infected patients. Patients that failed IDHPE and went onto 2SR had similar outcomes to those that had a 2SR alone. IDHPE should still be considered in the treatment algorithm of infected THA.

Open long bone fractures have been considered orthopaedic emergencies requiring immediate irrigation, debridement and stabilization. Concomitant traumatic brain injuries may preclude the immediate operative treatment of open fractures. The purpose of this study was to review patients with open tibial diaphyseal fractures whose operative tibial fracture management was delayed because of a concomitant traumatic brain injury to determine if there is an increased rate of infection or non-union.

After obtaining IRB approval, the trauma registry was scanned for patients who sustained both traumatic brain injury with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) equal to two or greater and an open tibial diaphyseal fracture. From January 1, 1996 to June 1, 2001, 28 patients with 31 open tibial shaft fractures were identified (Grade I=1, II=6, IIIA=17, IIIB= 7). There were 24 males and 4 females with an average age of 35 years (range 13–69 years of age). The mechanism of injury was motor vehicle collision or pedestrian versus motor vehicle accident for all patients. The mean time to operative irrigation, debridement, and stabilization was 11 hours (range 2–152 hours). Thirteen patients underwent operative orthopaedic treatment within 8 hours (mean 4.4 ± 1.3 hours), and 15 patients underwent delayed debridement (mean 35 ± 35 hours). Twenty fractures were stabilized with intramedullary nailing, 9 fractures were stabilized with external fixation, one fracture was stabilized with a compression plate, and one fracture treated in a cast. A review of clinic records and telephone follow-up interviews was used to determine the rates of infection or non-union. Infection was defined as a positive deep surgical culture for bacteria upon repeat irrigation and debridement. Non-union was defined as any clinically and radiographically unhealed fracture requiring further operative procedures.

The average length of follow up was 2.9 years (range 1 month to 6.5 years). Of the 31 open tibial diaphyseal fractures, four fractures (12.9%) were complicated by infection and four fractures (12.9%) went on to non-union. There was no statistical difference in the rates of infection or non-union in patients who underwent irrigation and debridement within eight hours and those that underwent irrigation and debridement after eight hours from the time of initial presentation (odds ratio=1.02, p=0.15). Furthermore there was no correlation between the ultimate presence of infection/non-union and grade of open tibial shaft fracture, initial method of fixation, timing of wound closure (immediate, delayed primary closure, or split-thickness skin graft or flap), severity of overall injury, and epidemiological characteristics.

In this subset of 28 patients with 31 open tibial shaft fractures and concomitant traumatic brain injuries, there was no difference in the incidence of infection or non-union in patients who underwent operative treatment within eight hours of admission to hospital and those who underwent operative treatment after eight hours. The results of this study should be considered in the prioritization of care for the multiply injured trauma patient.

Purpose: There is very little evidence to guide treatment of patients with spinal surgical site infection (SSI) who require irrigation and debridement (I& D) with respect to need for single or multiple I& D’s. The purpose of this study is to build a predictive model which stratifies patients with spinal SSI to determine which patients will go on to need single versus multiple I& D.

Method: A consecutive series of 128 patients from a tertiary spine center (collected from 1999–2005) who required I& D for spinal SSI, were studied based on data from a prospectively collected outcomes database. Over 30 variables were identified by extensive literature review as possible risk factors for SSI, and tested as possible predictors of risk for multiple I& D. Logistic regression was conducted to assess each variable’s predictability by a “bootstrap” statistical method. Logistic regression was applied using outcome of I& D – single or multiple as the “response”.

Results: 24/128 patients required multiple I& D. Primary spine diagnosis was approximately represented by ¼ trauma, ¼ deformity, ¼ degenerative and ¼ oncology/inflammatory/other. Six predictors: spine location, medical comorbidities, microbiology of the SSI, presence of distant site infection (ie. UTI or bacteremia), presence of instrumentation and bone graft type, proved to be the most reliable predictors of need for multiple I& D. Internal validation of the predictive model yielded area under the curve (AUC) of .84

Conclusion: Infection factors played an important role in need for multiple I& D. Patients with +MRSA culture or those with distant site infection such as bacteremia with or without UTI or pneumonia, were strong predictors of need for multiple I& D. Presence of instrumentation, location of surgery in the posterior lumbar spine and use of non-autograft bone predicted multiple I& D. Diabetes also proved to be the most significant medical comorbidity for multiple I& D.

Aims

Despite long-standing dogma, a clear relationship between the timing of surgical irrigation and debridement (I&D) and the development of subsequent deep infection has not been established in the literature. Traditionally, I&D of an open fracture has been recommended within six hours of injury based on animal studies from the 1970s, however the clinical basis for this remains unclear. Using data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial of 2,447 open fracture patients, the primary objective of this secondary analysis is to determine if a relationship exists between timing of wound I&D (within six hours of injury vs beyond six hours) and subsequent reoperation rate for infection or healing complications within one year for patients with open limb fractures requiring surgical treatment.

Aims

Failure of irrigation and debridement (I&D) for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is influenced by numerous host, surgical, and pathogen-related factors. We aimed to develop and validate a practical, easy-to-use tool based on machine learning that may accurately predict outcome following I&D surgery taking into account the influence of numerous factors.

Aims

The current pandemic caused by COVID-19 is the biggest challenge for national health systems for a century. While most medical resources are allocated to treat COVID-19 patients, several non-COVID-19 medical emergencies still need to be treated, including vertebral fractures and spinal cord compression. The aim of this paper is to report the early experience and an organizational protocol for emergency spinal surgery currently being used in a large metropolitan area by an integrated team of orthopaedic surgeons and neurosurgeons.

Objectives. Irrigation is the cornerstone of treating skeletal infection by eliminating pathogens in wounds. A previous study shows that irrigation with normal saline (0.9%) and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) could improve the removal of Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) and Escherichia coli (E. coli) compared with normal saline (NS) alone. However, it is still unclear whether EDTA solution is effective against infection with drug-resistant bacteria. Methods. We established three wound infection models (skin defect, bone-exposed, implant-exposed) by inoculating the wounds with a variety of representative drug-resistant bacteria including methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), extended spectrum beta-lactamase-producing E. coli (ESBL-EC), multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MRPA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MRAB), multidrug-resistant Enterobacter (MRE), and multidrug-resistant Proteus mirabilis (MRPM). Irrigation and debridement were repeated until the wound culture became negative. The operating times required to eliminate pathogens in wounds were compared through survival analysis. Results. Compared with other groups (NS, castile soap, benzalkonium chloride, and bacitracin), the EDTA group required fewer debridement and irrigation operations to achieve pathogen eradication in all three models of wound infection. Conclusion. Irrigation with EDTA solution was more effective than the other irrigation fluids used in the treatment of wound infections caused by drug-resistant pathogens. Cite this article: Z. Deng, F. Liu, C. Li. Therapeutic effect of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid irrigation solution against wound infection with drug-resistant bacteria in a rat model: an animal study. Bone Joint Res 2019;8:189–198. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.85.BJR-2018-0280.R3

Effectiveness of Liposomal Bupivacaine for Post-Operative Pain Control in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomised, Double Blind, Controlled Study. Pericapsular Injection with Free Ropivacaine Provides Equivalent Post-Operative Analgesia as Liposomal Bupivacaine following Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. Total Knee Arthroplasty in the 21st Century: Why Do They Fail? A Fifteen-Year Analysis of 11,135 Knees. Cryoneurolysis for Temporary Relief of Pain in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multi-Center, Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomised, Controlled Trial. Pre-Operative Freezing of Sensory Nerves for Post-TKA Pain: Preliminary Results from a Prospective, Randomised, Double-Blind Controlled Trial. Proximalization of the Tibial Tubercle Osteotomy: A Solution for Patella Infera during Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty. Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Based on Species of Infecting Organism: A Decision Analysis. Alpha-Defensin Test for Diagnosis of PJI in the Setting of Failed Metal-on-Metal Bearings or Corrosion. Risk of Reinfection after Irrigation and Debridement for Treatment of Acute Periprosthetic Joint Infection following TKA. Serum Metal Levels for the Diagnosis of Adverse Local Tissue Reaction Secondary to Corrosion in Metal-on-Polyethylene Bearing Total Hip Arthroplasty. Intra-Articular Injection for Painful Hip OA - A Randomised, Double-Blinded Study. Six-Year Follow-up of Hip Decompression with Concentrated Bone Marrow Aspirate to Treat Femoral Head Osteonecrosis. No Benefit of Computer-Assisted TKA: 10-Year Results of a Prospective Randomised Study

Failure of a two-stage exchange arthroplasty for management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a major clinical challenge. There is a paucity of information regarding the outcome of further surgical intervention in these patients. Thus, we aim to report the clinical outcomes of subsequent surgical intervention following a failed prior two-stage exchange. Our institutional database was used to identify 60 patients (42 knees and 18 hips) with a failed prior two-stage exchange from infection, who underwent further surgical intervention between 1998 and 2012 and had a minimum of two years follow-up. A retrospective review was performed to extract relevant clinical information, such as mortality, microbiology, and subsequent surgeries. Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria were used to define PJI, and treatment success was defined using the Delphi criteria as previously reported. Irrigation and debridement (I&D) was performed after a failed two-stage exchange in 61.7% (37/60) patients. The failure rate of I&D in this cohort was 51.3% (19/37). Two patients underwent amputation after I&D due to uncontrolled infection. A total of 40 patients underwent an intended a second two-stage exchange. Reimplantation occurred in only 65% of cases (26/40), and infection was controlled in 61.6% (16/26) of patients. An interim spacer exchange was required in 15% (6/40) of the cases. Of the 14 cases that did not undergo a second stage reimplantation, 5 required amputation, 6 had retained spacers, 1 underwent arthrodesis, and 2 patients died. Further surgical intervention after a failed prior two-stage exchange has poor outcomes. I&D has a high failure rate and many of the patients who are deemed candidates for a second two-stage exchange either do not undergo reimplantation for various reasons or fail after reimplantation. The management of PJI clearly remains imperfect, and there is a dire need for further innovations that may improve the care of these PJI patients

Background. Irrigation and débridement (I&D), often with exchange of modular polyethylene components, is commonly used to treat acute periprosthetic infection (PPI) following total joint arthroplasty. Two-stage revision, the “Gold Standard” for PPIs' is more invasive, requires more resources, creating controversy over recommended initial treatment of PPIs. This study seeks to determine the success rate of an “intent to treat” approach utilizing I&Ds with progression to two stage revisions as required. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 5193 hip and knee joint arthroplasties performed over a 63 month period and identified 46 (20 female, 26 male, mean age 60) deep postoperative (within 365 days) infections that were initially managed with an “intention to treat and cure” I&D, with or without poly exchange. We investigated the overall success rate of this approach and the requirements for additional surgical procedures, as well other associated factors. 34 were managed with I&Ds only and 12 with two stage revisions as well. Results. Infection eradication with implant retention was accomplished in 33 patients with I&Ds alone (72%). Of these, 25 required one I&D, 6 required 2 I&Ds and 2 required 3 I&Ds. 12 had 2-stage revisions, with 7 successes, 3 failures (1 each – amputation, fusion and infection recurrence after reimplantation) and 2 refusing revision of spacers. One had fusion after I&D without attempted staged revision. Thus, overall 40 of 46 (83%) were successfully managed after beginning with an “intent to treat” I&D and 33 of 46 (72%) patients avoided any surgeries other than I&Ds, thereby minimizing their cost, pain and morbidity. Conclusions. This preliminary study, which will require further follow-up, appears to support beginning the treatment of selected acute postoperative infected arthroplasties with an initial I&D and then tailoring further treatments based on individual factors. Level of Evidence This study was a retrospective comparative study, Level III evidence. Key Words: IRRIGATION AND DEBRIDEMENT, I&D, PERIPROSTHETIC INFECTION, TWO STAGE REVISION, TOTAL HIP, TOTAL KNEE

Introduction. The infection rate after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has been shown to be 1–2% in multiple series and registry data. Irrigation, debridement, and polyethylene exchange (IDPE) is a common first line treatment in many cases of acute prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The reinfection rate in open IDPE procedures is variable with studies showing reinfection rates of 10–70% depending on various patient and microbial factors. Our pilot study aimed to determine if the bacterial load in infected total joints was sufficiently reduced by IDPE to allow for the use of post-debridement cultures as an independent marker of procedural success. Methods. 46 prosthetic joint infections underwent irrigation and debridement using 6L of normal saline and 3L of a normal saline and bacitracin mixture prior to the insertion of a new polyethylene liner. This protocol utilized a single equipment setup with all surgical members donning new gloves prior to polyethylene exchange. Between 3 and 5 intraoperative cultures were obtained both prior to and after debridement as per the surgeon's standard protocol. A two-tailed student's t-test was used to evaluate for any differences in the rate of positive culture between these two groups. Results. Of all pre- and post-debridement cultures sampled 66.5% and 60.7% of cultures were positive respectively. No significant difference in the rate of positive intraoperative culture was found between pre-debridement and post-debridement groups (p = 0.52). In 32 of 46 (69%) cases there was no difference in the total number of positive cultures despite a thorough debridement. Conclusions. Our data shows that open debridement of PJI does not provide a sterile environment, and post-debridement cultures should not be used as an independent marker of procedural success. The role of an irrigation and debridement to reduce the bacterial burden and potentiate the clearance of an infection is established but its efficacy is unclear, and the inability to create a post-debridement sterile environment is a concern

The infection rate after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has been shown to be 1–2% in multiple series and registry data. Irrigation, debridement, and polyethylene exchange (IDPE) is a common first line treatment in many cases of acute prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The reinfection rate in open IDPE procedures is variable with studies showing reinfection rates of 10–70% depending on various patient and microbial factors. Our pilot study aimed to determine if the bacterial load in infected total joints was sufficiently reduced by IDPE to allow for the use of post-debridement cultures as an independent marker of procedural success. 46 prosthetic joint infections underwent irrigation and debridement using 6L of normal saline and 3L of a normal saline and bacitracin mixture prior to the insertion of a new polyethylene liner. This protocol utilized a single equipment setup with all surgical members donning new gloves prior to polyethylene exchange. Between 3 and 5 intraoperative cultures were obtained both prior to and after debridement as per the surgeon's standard protocol. A two-tailed student's t-test was used to evaluate for any differences in the rate of positive culture between these two groups. Of all pre- and post-debridement cultures sampled 66.5% and 60.7% of cultures were positive respectively. No significant difference in the rate of positive intraoperative culture was found between pre-debridement and post-debridement groups (p = 0.52). In 32 of 46 (69%) cases there was no difference in the total number of positive cultures despite a thorough debridement. Our data shows that open debridement of PJI does not provide a sterile environment, and post-debridement cultures should not be used as an independent marker of procedural success. The role of an irrigation and debridement to reduce the bacterial burden and potentiate the clearance of an infection is established but its efficacy is unclear, and the inability to create a post-debridement sterile environment is a concern

Aims

We aimed to compare reoperations following distal radial fractures (DRFs) managed with early fixation versus delayed fixation following initial closed reduction (CR).

Aims

The optimal bearing surface design for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of fixed-bearing (FB) and mobile-bearing (MB) UKAs from a single high-volume institution.

Aims

Endoprosthetic reconstruction with a distal femoral arthroplasty (DFA) can be used to treat distal femoral bone loss from oncological and non-oncological causes. This study reports the short-term implant survivorship, complications, and risk factors for patients who underwent DFA for non-neoplastic indications.