Aim. The incidence of fractured neck of femur (FNOF) is increasing yearly. Many of these patients undergo hip hemiarthroplasty. High dose dual-antibiotic cement (HDDAC) has been shown to reduce rates of deep surgical site infection (SSI) when compared to the current standard low dose single-antibiotic cement (LDSAC) in a quasi-randomised controlled trial. Some concerns exist regarding the use of HDDAC and the development of resistance. We reviewed cases of infection in LDSAC and HDDAC bone cement with regard to causative organism and resistance profile. Method. A retrospective analysis was undertaken of all hemiarthroplasties within our trust from April 2008 to December 2014. We identified all patients in this time period who acquired a deep SSI from the trust SSI surveillance database. The infecting organisms and susceptibility patterns were collated for each cement. Results. We identified 1941 hemiarthroplasties. There were 36 deep surgical site infections representing an infection rate of 3.1% in LDSAC patients and 1.2% in HDDAC patients. A wider variety of organisms were seen in the LDSAC compared to HDDAC. Staphylococcus epidermidis accounted for the majority of infections in both LDSAC and HDDAC patients. Infection with Corynebacterium species and Staphylococcus aureus was eliminated completely in HDDAC. There was minimal change in the proportion of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. A change in resistance was not demonstrated amongst infections caused by Gram-negative bacteria. In Gram-positive bacteria, resistance to a number of antibiotics increased using HDDAC compared to LDSAC, most notably to clindamycin and gentamicin within the coagulase negative staphylococci. However, levels of resistance remained low to teicoplanin, vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid and rifampicin. Conclusions. A lower infection rate was seen in HDDAC. Direct comparison demonstrated changes in resistance profiles caused by Gram-positive organisms. 24,000 patients undergo hip hemiarthroplasty annually. Extrapolating our results to this cohort would demonstrate 744 infections in LDSAC and 288 infections in HDDAC. Of these, resistance to both clindamycin and gentamicin would be seen in 180 patients with LDSAC and 177 patients with HDDAC. Overall, this review supports the continued use of HDDAC in FNOF patients. High dose dual antibiotic cement = Copal G+C, Heraeus Medical, UK. Low dose single antibiotic cement = Palacos R+G, Heraeus Medical, UK

Aim. This study aims to describe our department experience with single stage revision (SSR) for chronic prosthetic-joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) between 2005 and 2014 and to analyze success rates and morbidity results of patients submitted to SSR for infected THA according to pathogen. Method. We retrospectively reviewed our 10 years of results (2005–2014) of patients submitted to SSR of the hip combined with IV and oral antibiotic therapy for treatment of chronic PJI (at least 4 weeks of symptoms), with a minimum follow-up of four years (n=26). Patients were characterized for demographic data, comorbidities, identified germ and antibiotic therapy applied (empiric and/or targeted). Outcomes analyzed were re-intervention rate (infection-related or aseptic), success rate (clinical and laboratory assessment), length of stay, morbidity and mortality outcomes. Results. In this period, 26 single-stage revisions for chronic PJI of the hip were performed. Patients average age was 72 years (range 44–82). Ten patients were women. The average time of follow up was 69 months (range 4 to 12 years). The most commonly isolated bacteria were coagulase-negative Staphylococci (30%), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (18%) and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (15%). It wasn't possible to identify the germ in 19% of the patients and other 23% were polymicrobial. Targeted antibiotic therapy was administered to 73% of patients and the most used targeted antibiotics were Vancomycin (53%), Linezolid (32%) and Rifampicin (21%). Mean length of stay was 25 days. In the follow-up period, 9 patients (35%) required a re-intervention for infection relapse. Two patients (8%) needed surgery because of persistent instability. During the follow-up period, the infection-free survival was 65% (33% for MRSA; 82% for coagulase-negative Staphylococci) and the surgery-free survival was 62%. Six patients (23%) died during the follow-up, all due to other medical conditions not related to hip infection. Conclusions. Our experience suggests that SSR is associated with good outcomes and low re-intervention rate, except in the case of infection due to MRSA. In this last group, the results were significantly poorer, what leads to suggest that a two-stage revision may be a better option. The potential advantages of a SSR include good rates of infection eradication, a decrease in surgical morbidity and mortality as well as a decrease in healthcare and global economic costs. As such, a one-stage aggressive surgical attitude in addition to targeted antibiotherapy seems to be a suitable solution in selected patients