Acetabular fractures present a challenge. Anatomical reduction can be achieved by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). However, in elderly patients with complex fracture patterns and osteoporotic bone stock, “fix and replace” has become an option in the management of these injuries. This involves ORIF of the acetabulum to enable insertion of a press fit cup and subsequent cemented femoral stem at the index surgery. A Retrospective analysis of all operatively managed acetabular fractures by a regional Pelvic and Acetabular Trauma service (01/01/2018-30/05/2023) STATA used for analysis. 34 patients undergoing “fix and replace” surgery. Of the 133 patients managed with ORIF, 21 subsequently required Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Mean follow up was 2.7 years versus 5.1. There was no statistical significance between the two groups with regards to BMI or sex. Mean age in the “fix and replace” group was 68 compared to 48 in the ORIF and subsequent THA group. This reached statistical significance between the two groups (p=0.001).ASA and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3 and 3 in “fix and replace” and 2 and 1.2 in ORIF to THA group) and Charlson Comorbidity Index both were statistically significantly different (p=0.006 and p=0.027, respectively). High energy mechanism of injury accounted for 56% of the “fix and replace” group compared to 48% in the ORIF to THA. 74% of “fix and replace” were associated fractures compared to 53% of ORIF to THA. Wait to surgery was 3 days for “fix and replace” while 186 days was the mean wait time from listing to THA for the ORIF to THA group. Complication rate was 41% versus 43% in the two groups. 14% in the ORIF to THA group developed PJI versus 6% in “fix and replace”. Fix and replace allows early mobilisation in frailer, elderly patients. Our results show fewer returns to theatre and less PJI in patients having arthroplasty as part of “fix and replace” than subsequent to Open reduction internal fixation

Aims

The aim of this study was to perform the first population-based description of the epidemiological and health economic burden of fracture-related infection (FRI).

Aims. Currently, the most common approach for the management of a chronic PJI is a Two-Stage Replacement; because of success rates exceeding 90% when using an antibiotic impregnated cement spacer. Reliable information regarding the etiologic microorganism and its sensitivities is essential to select the antimicrobial therapy that should be used locally in the bone cement spacer during the first stage surgery as well as to select the appropriate microbiological systemic agent. Diagnostic algorithms focus to the importance of joint aspiration cultures although in the modern literature, preoperative joint aspiration has a broad range of values of sensitivity and the proportion of “dry-aspirations” is not well assessed. This low sensitivity of aspiration fluid samples in chronic-PJI is partly attributable to the fact that the majority of the microorganisms in these infections grow in biofilms attached to the implant. We have developed this biopsy technique in an effort to improve the identification rates of the causative organism. Materials and methods. A sample is harvested through a 4 mm bone trephine and the target is the bone-prosthesis gap. We have compared the results of preoperative PIB with the results of cultures from intra-operative tissue collected during the first stage surgery. In both cases a prolonged culture protocol (10 days) in enrichment media was used. On the basis of this relation, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were calculated. Results. Twenty-four PIB were done on the 24 patients (10 hips and 14 knees) who subsequently underwent two-stage revision surgery because of high suspicion of PJI between January 2007 and December 2009. A retrospective analysis was performed in these 24 patients (13 women and 11 men) in the mean age of 70 years (from 63 to 88 years old). Nineteen of the cases were primary and 5 were revision arthroplasty. Nineteen patients (79%) were positive for infection from operative tissue cultures. The sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.54–0.93); the specificity was 0.80 (95% CI, 0,30–0.99), the positive predictive value was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.67–0.99), the negative predictive value was 0.50 (95% CI, 17.5–82.5) and the accuracy was 0.79. Conclusion. PIB is a useful test to, preoperatively, isolate the infecting bacteria. The values of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy are on the average of the currently published with joint aspiration or biopsy samples cultures. Although comparative study is necessary we believe that the PIB could be useful in cases with high suspicion of PJI and negative joint aspiration cultures and in cases where no fluid is aspired from the joint, in order to preoperatively isolate the infecting bacteria

Aims

Monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) or neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) are useful for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), but their diagnostic values are unclear for screening fixation-related infection (FRI) in patients for whom conversion total hip arthroplasty (THA) is planned after failed internal fixation for femoral neck fracture.

Aims

Deep surgical site infection (SSI) remains an unsolved problem after hip fracture. Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) has become a mainstream treatment in elective periprosthetic joint infection; however, evidence for DAIR after infected hip hemiarthroplaty is limited.

Aims

This study aimed to investigate the role of quantitative histological analysis in the diagnosis of fracture-related infection (FRI).