Peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one the most devastating complications of joint arthroplasty. Although PJI is an infrequent complication (the reported incidence is 1%-2% in the United States), it is the most common indication for revision total knee arthroplasty in the Medicare population and the third most frequent indication for revision total hip arthroplasty. Moreover, the prevalence of PJI appears to be on the rise, with a projected number exceeding 60,000 to 70,000 cases in the United States by 2020. It is estimated that more than 25% of revision procedures annually are attributed to PJI and this number is expected to increase in the upcoming years. The increase in the prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and other comorbidities among the patient population and the emergence of resistant infecting organisms are some of the reasons for the expected rise in the number of infections that medical community will witness. The challenges that PJI present to the orthopaedic community are on many fronts. Prevention of PJI has proven to be a difficult task indeed. Effective strategies for prevention of PJI are being refined. The Center for Disease Control will be publishing its updated Surgical Site Prevention Guidelines in the next few months that consists of specific recommendations for prevention of PJI. In recent years, strides are made in introducing novel molecular techniques for diagnosis of PJI, which may stand to change our practices. The current surgical technique for management of PJI, besides the immense cost, fall short of delivering high success to the patients. The major problem in eradication of infection relates to formation of biofilm on the implant surface and internalization of the organisms by affected cells. Biofilm is a sophisticated structure comprising of organisms embedded in multiple layers of glycoccalyx that allows the organisms to evade host immunity and is impenetrable to antibiotics. These organisms are capable of communicating through molecular mechanisms such as quorum sensing that affords them advantage for survival in the host environment. In recent years strategies to prevent colonization of the implant surface, an essential first step in formation of biofilm, or biofilm disruption techniques have been introduced. A recent International Consensus meeting on PJI that assembled more than 350 experts identified some of the best practices in this field and identified areas in need of future research. Moving into the future, the field of orthopaedics in general and PJI in particular stand to benefit from the discoveries in the field of molecular diagnostics, metabolomics and epigenetics

To report our experience with the use of local antibiotic co-delivery with a synthetic bone graft substitute during a second stage re-implantation of an infected proximal humeral replacement. A 72 year old man was admitted to our department with a pathological fracture through an osteolytic lesion in the left proximal humerus, due to IgG Myelomatosis. He was initially treated with a cemented proximal humerus replacement hemiarthroplasty. Peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) with significant joint distention was evident three weeks post operatively. Revision surgery confirmed presence of a large collection of pus and revealed disruption of the soft tissue reattachment tube, as well as complete retraction of rotator cuff and residual capsule. All modular components were removed and an antibiotic-laden cement spacer (1.8g of Clindamycin and Gentamycin, respectively) was implanted onto the well-fixed cemented humeral stem. Initial treatment with i.v. Amoxicillin/Clavulanic acid was changed to Rifampicin and Fusidic Acid during a further 8 weeks after cultures revealed growth of S. epidermidis. During second stage revision, a hybrid inverse prosthesis with silver coating was implanted, with a total of 20 ml Cerament ™G (injected into the glenoid cavity prior to insertion of the base plate and around the humeral implant-bone interface) and again stabilized with a Trevira tube. Unfortunately, this prosthesis remained unstable, ultimately requiring re-revision to a completely new constrained reverse prosthesis with a custom glenoid shell and silver-coated proximal humeral component. 18 months postoperatively, the patient's shoulder remains pain free and stable, without signs of persistent or reinfection since the initial second stage revision. The function however, unfortunately remains poor. This case report illustrates the application of an antibiotic-eluting bone graft substitute in a specific clinical situation, where co-delivery of an antibiotic together with a bone remodeling agent may be beneficial to simultaneously address PJI as well as poor residual bone quality

Aim. Advocates of Debridement-Antibiotics-and-Implant-Retention (DAIR) in hip peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) argue that a procedure not disturbing a sound prosthesis-bone interface is likely to lead to better survival and functional outcome compared to revision. However, no evidence supports this. This case-control study's aims were to compare outcome of DAIRs for infected 1° total hip arthroplasty (THA) with outcomes following 1° THA and 2-stage revisions of infected 1° THAs. Method. We retrospectively reviewed all DAIRs, performed for confirmed infected 1° THR (DAIR-Group, n=80), in our unit between 1997–2013. Data recorded included patient demographics, medical history, type of surgery and organism identified. Outcome measures included complications, mortality, implant survivorship and functional outcome using the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Outcome was compared with 2 control groups matched for gender and age; a cohort of 1° THA (1°-THA-Group, n=120) and a cohort of 2-stage revisions for infection (2-Stage-Revision-Group, n=66). Results. The mean age at DAIR was 69 years and mean follow-up was 8 years (SD:5). 60% of DAIRs were for early PJI (< six weeks). Greater infection eradication with DAIR was detected with early-PJI, interval less than a week between onset of symptoms and exchange of modular components with the DAIR procedure. Infection eradication, complications and re-operation rates were similar in the DAIR- and 2-stage-revision Groups (p>0.05). For hips with successful infection eradication with DAIR, the 5-yr survival (98%) was similar to the 1°THA-Group (98%) (p=0.3). The DAIR-Group had inferior OHS (38) compared to the 1°THA-Group (42) (p=0.02) but significantly better OHS compared to the 2-stage-revision-Group (31) (p=0.008). Patients that required only one DAIR for infection eradication had similar OHS (41) to the 1° THA-Group (p=0.2). Conclusions. DAIRs are associated with similar complication and infection eradication to 2-stage revisions. Exchange of modular components is advised for improved chances of infection eradication. Functional outcome following DAIRs was better than a 2-stage revision and as good as that of a 1° THA if a single DAIR was necessary for infection eradication

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). According to registry-based studies, some bearing couples are associated with an increased risk of PJI. The recent International Consensus on Periprosthetic Joint Infection stated that metal-on-metal (MOM) bearing surface appeared to be associated with a higher incidence of PJI. Based on emerging reports, the incidence of PJI appears to be different among different bearing surfaces. We conducted a multi-institutional study attempting to study this exact issue. The purpose of the study was to determine whether there was any difference in the incidence of PJI in two commonly used bearing couples (metal- on-polyethylene versus ceramic-on-polyethylene).

Based on a retrospective multi-institutional query all patients who received primary THA with MOP or COP bearing surfaces performed during 2005–2009 in two high-volume arthroplasty centers were identified. Demographic factors, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, complications and other relevant information were extracted. PJI was defined based on the MSIS (International Consensus) criteria. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine whether bearing coupling was independently correlated with PJI.

In our data, 25/2,921 (0.9%) patients with MOP and 11/2,643 (0.4%) patients with COP developed PJI. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.01). After the multivariate analysis, controlling for potential confounders (age, body mass index and length of hospital stay, Charlson comorbidity index), MOP bearing surface was found to be an independent factor correlating with higher incidence of PJI (odds ratio: 2.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.02–6.54, p=0.04).

The finding of this study, and others from centers in Europe, suggest that the bearing surface may have an influence on the incidence of PJI. Although, we had originally thought that ceramic bearing surfaces may be used in younger and healthier patients, the multivariate analyses that controlled for all these variables confirms that use of metal femoral head is an independent risk factor for development of PJI. The finding of this study is compelling and begs for future basic science mechanistic investigations.

There is limited evidence in the literature suggesting that ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) THA is associated with lower risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) than other bearing combinations especially metal-on-poly (MoP) and metal-on-metal (MoM). Pitto and Sedel reported hazard ratios of 1.3 – 2.1 for other bearing surfaces versus CoC. Of interest, the PJI rate was not significantly lower in the first 6 months, when most infections occur, but only became significant in the long term. While factors such as patient age, fixation, mode, OR type, use of body exhaust suits, and surgeon volume were considered in the multivariate analysis, BMI, medical comorbidities, and ASA class were not. This is a major weakness that casts doubt on the conclusion, since those three factors are MAJOR risk factors for PJI AND all three factors are more likely to be unevenly distributed, and much more likely present in groups other than CoC. The data was also limited by the fact that it was drawn from a retrospective review of National Registry data, The New Zealand Joint Registry. While similar findings have recently been reported from the Australian Joint Registry, the danger in attributing differences in outcomes to implants alone is possibly the single greatest danger in interpreting registry results. While device design can impact implant survival, other factors such as surgical technique, surgeon, hospital, and especially patient factors have a far greater likelihood of explaining differences in observed results. A recent report from the same New Zealand joint registry reported that obesity, ASA class, surgical approach, and trainee operations all were associated with higher PJI and all would be more likely in non-CoC THAs. Accuracy of diagnosis is also a major concern. Revision for trunnionosis is more common in non-CoC THA and is frequently misdiagnosed as PJI.

Numerous non-registry studies and reviews have compared PJI in CoC vs. other bearings and none have concluded than the incidence of PJI differed significantly.

Aim

Compare clinical outcomes following staged revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) secondary to either multidrug resistant (MDR) bacteria or non-MDR (NMDR) bacteria.

Background: Chronic prosthetic joint infection is a cause of patient morbidity and can be challenging to treat. Surgeons performing revision arthroplasty of the hip and knee are confronted with a growing number of patients with extensive loss of bone stock. The use of a modular endoprosthesis is a possible method of treatment in such patients.

Aim: The purpose of this study was to assess the functional outcomes and the success of a single and two stage revision procedure in eradicating chronic prosthetic joint infection using a femoral endoprosthesis.

Methods: A prospective database was reviewed of 20 patients who underwent a proximal, total or distal femoral endoprosthetic replacement after chronic prosthetic infection. Radiographs performed at the time of latest follow up were evaluated for signs of loosening, osteomyelitis and implant failure. The functional status was assessed using the Short Form (SF)-36 health survey score, Toronto extremity salvage score (TESS) and the Enneking score.

Results: Thirteen patients underwent a single stage revision procedure and seven had been treated with a staged revision. At the latest follow up none of the 13 patients treated with a single stage procedure had evidence of ongoing infection. Of the seven patients who had a staged revision, 3 patients had evidence of ongoing infection. The mean pre operative Enneking score for the entire group was 17.1 points and this improved to 47.5 points post operatively (p< 0.0002). The mean pre operative TESS score for the entire group was 42% and this improved to 59% post operatively (p< 0.005). There was also a statistically significant improvement in all of the components of the SF-36 score.

Conclusion: We believe that the use of a modular endo-prosthesis in the treatment of chronic prosthetic joint infection is a successful and viable option in eradicating infection, preserving the limb and providing a good functional result.

Aim

Dissolvable antibiotic-loaded calcium sulphate beads have been utilized for management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and for aseptic revision arthroplasty. However, wound drainage and toxic reactive synovitis have been substantial problems in prior studies. Currently a commercially pure, physiologic product has been introduced that may reduce complications associated with this treatment modality. We aim to answer the question: does a commercially pure, physiologic version of antibiotic-loaded calcium sulfate beads reduce wound drainage and provide efficacious treatment for PJI and aseptic revision arthroplasty?

Infection remains among the first reasons for failure of joint prosthesis. Currently, the golden standard for treating prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) is two-stage revision. However, two-stage procedures have been reported to be associated with higher costs and possible higher morbidity and mortality, compared to one-stage. Furthermore, recent studies showed the ability of a fast-resorbable, antibacterial-loaded hydrogel coating to reduce surgical site infections after joint replacement, by preventing bacterial colonization of implants. Aim of this study was then to compare the infection recurrence rate after a one-stage, cemenless exchange, performed with an antibacterial coated implant versus a standardized two-stage revision procedure.

In this two-center prospective study, 22 patients, candidate to revision surgery for PJI, were enrolled to undergo a one-stage revision surgery with cementless implants, coated intra-operatively with a fast-resorbable, antibiotic-loaded hyaluronan and poly-D,L-lactide based hydrogel coating (“Defensive Antibacterial Coating”, DAC, Novagenit, Italy). DAC was reconstructed according to manufacturer indications and loaded with Vancomycin or Vancomycin + Meropenem, according to cultural examinations, and directly spread onto the implant before insertion. This prospective cohort was compared with a retrospective series of 22 consecutive patients, matched for age, sex, host type, site of surgery, that underwent a two stage procedure, using a preformed, antibiotic-loaded spacer (Tecres, Italy) and a cementless implant. The second surgery, for definitive implant placing, was performed only after CRP normalization and no clinical sign of infection. Clinical, laboratory and radiographic evaluation were performed at 3, 6 and 12 months, and every 6 months thereafter. Infection recurrence was defined by the presence of a sinus tract communicating with the joint, or at least two among the following criteria: clinical signs of infections; elevated CRP and ESR; elevated synovial fluid WBC count; elevated synovial fluid leukocyte esterase; a positive cultural examination from synovial fluid; radiographic signs of stem loosening.

The two groups did not differ significantly for age, sex, host type and site of surgery (18 knees and 4 hips, respectively). The DAC hydrogel was loaded intra-operatively, according to cultural examination, with vancomycin (14 patients) or vancomycin and meropenem (8 cases). At a mean follow-up of 20.2 ± 6.3 months, 2 patients (9.1%) in the DAC group showed an infection recurrence, compared to 3 patients (13.6%) in the two-stage group. No adverse events associated with the use of DAC or radiographic loosening of the stem were observed at the latest follow-up months.

This is the first report on one-stage cementless revision surgery for PJI, performed with a fast-resorbable antibacterial hydrogel coating. Our data, although in a limited series of patients and at a relatively short follow-up, show similar infection recurrence rate after one-stage exchange with cementless, coated implants, compared to two-stage revision. These findings warrant further studies in the possible applications of antibacterial coating technologies to treat implant-related infections.

We retrospectively reviewed 30 two-stage revision procedures in 28 patients performed for fungal peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after a primary total knee replacement. Patients were followed for at least two years or until the infection recurred. The mean follow-up for patients who remained free of infection was 4.3 years (2.3 to 6.1). Overall, 17 patients were assessed as American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 3 or 4. The surgical protocol included removal of the infected implant, vigorous debridement and insertion of an articulating cement spacer. This was followed by at least six weeks of antimicrobial treatment and delayed reimplantation in all patients. The mean interval between removal of the prosthesis and reimplantation was 9.5 weeks (6 to 24). After reimplantation, patients took antifungal agents orally for a maximum of six months. Two knees became reinfected at one and two months post-operatively, respectively: one of these subsequently required arthrodesis because of uncontrolled infection.

Fungal PJIs can be treated successfully by removal of all infected material, appropriate antimicrobial treatment and delayed reimplantation.

The rate of peri-prosthetic infection following total joint replacement continues to rise, and attempts to curb this trend have included the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement at the time of primary surgery. We have investigated the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of the use of antibiotic-loaded cement for primary total knee replacement (TKR) by comparing the rate of infection in 3048 TKRs performed without loaded cement over a three-year period versus the incidence of infection after 4830 TKRs performed with tobramycin-loaded cement over a later period of time of a similar duration. In order to adjust for confounding factors, the rate of infection in 3347 and 4702 uncemented total hip replacements (THR) performed during the same time periods, respectively, was also examined. There were no significant differences in the characteristics of the patients in the different cohorts.

The absolute rate of infection increased when antibiotic-loaded cement was used in TKR. However, this rate of increase was less than the rate of increase in infection following uncemented THR during the same period. If the rise in the rate of infection observed in THR were extrapolated to the TKR cohort, 18 additional cases of infection would have been expected to occur in the cohort receiving antibiotic-loaded cement, compared with the number observed. Depending on the type of antibiotic-loaded cement that is used, its cost in all primary TKRs ranges between USD $2112.72 and USD $112 606.67 per case of infection that is prevented.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:65–9.

Objectives

The objective of this study is to determine an optimal antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) for infection prophylaxis in total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

High doses of intra-articular (IA) antibiotics has been shown to effectively achieve a minimal biofilm eradication concentration which could mitigate the need for removal of infected but well-ingrown cementless components of a total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, there are concerns that percutaneous catheters could lead to multi-resistance or multi-organism peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJI) following single stage THA revisions for PJI. Eighteen single-stage revision procedures were performed for acute (N=9) or chronic (N=9) PJI following a primary (N=12) or revision (N=6) cementless THA. Modular and loosened components were replaced. All well ingrown components were retained. Two Hickmann catheters were placed in the joint space. Along with intravenous antibiotics, IA antibiotics were injected twice a day for two weeks, followed by 3 months of oral antibiotics. Per-operative cultures demonstrated 4 multi-bacterial PJIs. None of the patients developed post-operatively an AB related renal or systemic dysfunction. At a mean follow-up of 38 months [range, 8–72] all patients had normal erythrocyte sedimentation rate and white blood cell count. Four had a slightly elevated C-reactive protein but were completely symptom free and did not show any sign of loosening at a mean of 27 months [range, 16–59]. Addition of high doses of IA antibiotics following single-stage revision for PJI in cementless THA, is an effective and safe treatment option that allows for retention of well-ingrown components. We found no evidence for residual implant infection or catheter induced multi-resistance. Total hip arthroplasty, revision surgery, Periprosthetic Joint Infection, Intra-articular antibiotics. Level 4 (Case series)

Introduction and Objective. Evidence in literature is contradicting regarding outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) and whether they are inferior to TKA in primary osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this review was to find out if any difference exists in the results of TKA between the two indications. Materials and Methods. The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Collaboration, and PubMed were searched and screened in duplicate for relevant studies. The selected studies were further subjected to quality assessment using the modified Coleman method. The primary outcome measure was patient reported outcome, and secondary outcome measures were infection, revision, stiffness, and patella tendon rupture. Results. A total of 18 studies involved 1129 patients with a mean age of 60.6 years (range 45.7–69) and follow up of 6.3 years. The time interval from index injury to TKA was 9.1 years. Knee Society Score (KSS) in PTOA reported in 12/18 studies showed functional improvement from 42.5 to 70 post-TKA exceeding minimally clinically important difference. In TKA for primary OA vs PTOA, deep peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) was reported in 1.9% vs 5.4% of patients, whilst revision of prosthesis at an average of 6 years post-operatively was performed in 2.6 vs 9.7% of patients. Conclusions. TKA is a successful treatment option for PTOA. However, the risk of significant complications like PJI and implant failure requiring revision is higher than primary OA cases. Patients should be counselled about those risks. Further well-designed comparative cohort-matched studies are needed to compare outcomes between the two populations

Aims. The International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection (ICM, Philadelphia 2018) recommended histology as one of the diagnostic tests although this is not routinely used in a number of UK hospitals. This study aims to explore the role of histology in the diagnosis of infection and whether it is of practical use in those cases where the microbiology samples are either diagnostically unclear or do not correspond to the pre-operative diagnosis or the clinical picture. Patients and Methods. We identified 85 patients who underwent revision knee arthroplasty for either septic or aseptic loosening and for whom both microbiology and histology samples were taken. The procedures were performed by the senior experienced surgeons specialised in revision knee arthroplasty in two centres from Liverpool. Each patient had a minimum of five tissue samples taken, using separate knife and forceps and each sample was divided in half and sent for microbiology and histology in different containers. Fifty-four patients (63.5%) underwent a single-staged revision; ten patients (11.8%) underwent the 1. st. stage of a two staged revision; eleven patients (12.9%) underwent the 2. nd. stage of a two staged revision; one patient (1.2%) underwent an additional revision stage; three patients (3.5%) were treated with a DAIR; three patients (3.5%) had a 2-in-1 revision; two patients (2.4%) had a debridement and polyethylene exchange; and one patient (1.2%) had an arthroscopy biopsy of knee replacement. The cost to process five microbiology samples for each patient was £122.45 on average and for the five histology samples was £130. Results. In 63.5% (n=54) the histology and microbiology confirmed an aseptic joint as suspected beforehand. In 8.2% (n=7) the histology result was the same as the microbiology result confirming infection as suspected beforehand. In 15.3% (n=13) where asepsis was suspected beforehand, one of the five microbiology samples unexpectedly grew an organism but all the histological samples showed no evidence of infection. In these cases, the histology result supported the diagnosis of the likelihood of a contaminant. In 5.9% (n=5) we found differences in the microbiology and histology in one sample and in 7.1% (n=6) the histology was different to the microbiology in more than one sample. Conclusions. In cases where the diagnosis of sepsis within a knee replacement is not in doubt due to pre-operative microbiology, we found no benefit in additional histology sampling. In 28.3% of the cases, the histology was of use in the diagnosis of infection in complex cases and a useful tool in the decision process for further management. In over half of the cases where the revision was for aseptic loosening, the histology result did not alter the management but 28.3% of cases that were thought to be aseptic, microbiology revealed at least one positive sample hence the histology was of use in making a final diagnosis, be that of infection, contamination or to rule out infection. Whilst histology is of use in the latter groups but not the aseptic group, these outcomes are not predictable until after the post-operative period hence histology is required in all these cases. Overall, the histology is a cheap test which is of benefit in the diagnosis of complex peri-prosthetic joint infection in one–third of cases and we support the ICM recommendation

Two-stage exchange remains the gold standard for treatment of peri-prosthetic joint infection after total hip replacement (THR). In the first stage, all components and associated cement if present are removed, an aggressive debridement is undertaken including a complete synovectomy, and an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer is put in place. Patients are then treated with six weeks of parenteral antibiotics, followed by an ‘antibiotic free period’ to help ensure the infection has been eradicated. If the clinical evaluation and serum inflammatory markers suggest the infection has resolved, then the second stage can be completed, which involves removal of the cement spacer, repeat debridement, and placement of a new THR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:84–7

Introduction. Accurate diagnosis of peri-prosthetic joint infection is critical to allow adequate treatment. Currently, the criteria of the Musculo-Skeletal Infection Society (MSIS) serve as a validated reference tool. More recently, these criteria have been modified for better accuracy. The goal of this study was to compare retrospectively the diagnostic accuracy of these two different tools in cases of known peri-prosthetic hip or knee infection or in aseptic cases and to analyze one additional criterion: presence of an early loosening (prior to 2 years after implantation). Material – Methods. All cases of hip or knee prosthesis exchange operated on at our department during the year 2017 have been selected. There were 130 cases in 127 patients: 67 men and 60 women, with a mean age of 69 years − 69 total hip (THA) and 61 total knee (TKA) arthroplasties. 74 cases were septic and 53 cases were aseptic. All criteria included in both classifications were collected: presence of a fistula, results of bacteriological samples, ESR and CRP levels, analysis of the joint fluid, histological analysis. Additionally, the presence of an early loosening was recorded. The diagnosis accuracy of the classical MSIS classification and of the 2018 modification were assessed and compared with a Chi-square test at a 0.05 level of significance. Results. The conventional MSIS classification correctly discriminated between infected and non-infected cases in 128/130 cases (98%). There were two failures by infected cases: one case was considered infected with no major criteria and only three minor criteria; one case was considered infected with no major criteria and only two minor criteria. There was no failure by non-infected cases. The new MSIS classification correctly discriminated between infected and non-infected cases in 129/130 cases (99%). There was one single failure by infected cases: one case was considered infected despite a score of 4 points. There was no significant difference between the diagnostic accuracy of both classifications. The presence of an early loosening had a high specificity (85%) but a low sensitivity (22%). Discussion. The conventional MSIS classification had a high diagnostic accuracy. The new MSIS classification offered only minor, non significant increase of this accuracy. As the new classification involves several additional biological assays, these results might question the cost-effectiveness of the new classification. The presence of an early loosening might be an interesting additional criterion at no additional cost

Introduction. Antibiotic loaded absorbable calcium sulphate beads (ALCSB) are an increasingly popular adjunct in the treatment of musculoskeletal infections including osteomyelitis and peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJI). Limited data exist regarding the clinical indications and biochemical outcomes of ALCSB in PJI cases. Aims. To determine the proportion of organisms that were sensitive to the gentamicin and vancomycin that we add to the ALCSB as a part of our treatment protocol and to determine the prevalence of postoperative hypercalcaemia when used for treatment of hip and knee DAIR (debridement and implant retention) and revision arthroplasty for PJI. Methods. A retrospective review of 160 hip and knee revisions using ALCSB performed between June 2015 and May 2018 at a tertiary unit was performed. 10–40 cc of ALCSB was used for each case containing vancomycin and gentamicin. Data recorded included patient demographics, comorbidities, indication for surgery, operative intervention, microbiological results and serum biochemistry for calcium levels. Results. The cohort consisted of 91 males and 69 females, with a mean age of 69.0 years (21.3 to 93.1) and mean BMI of 34.7(12.6 to 48.1). 56 (35%) had single-stage revision, 45 (28.1%) had first stage revision, 35 (21.9) had DAIR, 19 (11.9%) had second stage revision and 5 (3.1%) other procedures. Organisms included staphylococcus aureus (30.0%), culture-negative (27.5%), staphylococcus epidermidis (18.1%), and pseudomonas aeruginosa (3.1%). 54.3% were sensitive to both vancomycin and gentamicin, 25.0% to vancomycin only and 8.6% to gentamicin only. 11.9% (19/160) of patients had transient post-operative hypercalcaemia (normal range 2.2–2.7mmol/L), peaking at day 6–7 and resolved with hydration by day 10 postoperatively. Preoperatively, 26.9% had albumin <35 g/L and 49.3% had some degree of renal impairment with an eGFR <90 ml/min. Conclusion. The use of ALCSB allows local delivery of vancomycin and gentamicin in lower limb PJI. Organisms were sensitive to this antibiotic combination in 88% cases. Care must be taken to monitor calcium for 10 days post-operatively

Metal Ion Levels Not Useful in Failed M-O-M Hips: Systematic Review; Revision of Failed M-O-M THA at a Tertiary Center; Trunnionosis in Metal-on-Poly THA?; Do Ceramic Heads Eliminate Trunnionosis?; Iliopsoas Impingement After 10 THA; Pain in Young, Active Patients Following THA; Pre-operative Injections Increase Peri-prosthetic THA Infection; Debridement and Implant Retention in THA Infection; THA after Prior Lumbar Spinal Fusion; Lumbar Back Surgery Prior to THA Associated with Worse Outcomes; Raising the Joint Line Causes Mid-Flexion Instability in TKA; No Improvement in Outcomes with Kinematic Alignment in TKA; Botox For TKA Flexion Contracture; Intra-operative Synovitis Predicts Worse Outcomes After TKA for OA; When is it Safe for Patients to Drive After Right TKA?; Alpha-Defensin for Peri-prosthetic Joint Infection; Medial Tibia Overhang and Pain Score After TKA

Aim. The majority of peri-prosthetic joint infection occurring within 1 year of surgery is due to introduction of microbes at the time of surgery. Lavage of total knee replacement leaves a pool of fluid on the surgical drapes. This fluid could be a direct source of wound contamination via suction catheter tip, gloves or instruments. Method. Twenty patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty had a sample of drape fluid sent, after prosthesis implantation, for standard and enrichment culture. The surgery took place in a laminar low theatre with scrub teams in togas. *. and drapes. **. Normal saline was used as the wash. 20ml fluid was taken via syringe and transferred to blood culture bottles in theatre post-operatively. Results. Ten samples (50%) showed bacterial contamination; of these 55% were one organism and 45% polymicrobial. Coagulase negative staphylococcus (CNS) occurred in 90% of positive samples, followed by Moraxella (20%) and MSSA (10%). Organisms grown included skin, nasal, respiratory and environmental pathogens, all but one previously documented as causing septic arthritis. Conclusions. The major contaminant found in our study, CNS, is a skin commensal. This could be from increasing resistance to skin preparations or a decline in theatre etiquette. Fluid collecting in the drapes is a source of potential contamination. All aspects of infection control protocol need continual re-assessment including drape quality, skin and patient preparation and theatre etiquette. Surgeons cannot assume that routine skin preparation and peri-operative antibiotics will eradicate bacterial contamination. It is all our responsibility to implement best infection control practice both in the operating room and through entire patient journey