Aims. In patients with a “dry” aspiration during the investigation of prosthetic joint infection (PJI), saline lavage is commonly used to obtain a sample for analysis. The aim of this study was to investigate prospectively the impact of saline lavage on synovial fluid analysis in revision arthroplasty. Methods. Patients undergoing revision hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (TKA) for any septic or aseptic indication were enrolled. Intraoperatively, prior to arthrotomy, the maximum amount of fluid possible was aspirated to simulate a dry tap (pre-lavage) followed by the injection with 20 ml of normal saline and re-aspiration (post-lavage). Pre- and post-lavage synovial white blood cell (WBC) count, percent polymorphonuclear cells (%PMN), and cultures were compared. Results. A total of 78 patients had data available for analysis; 17 underwent revision THA and 61 underwent revision TKA. A total of 16 patients met modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI. Pre- and post-lavage %PMNs were similar in septic patients (87% vs 85%) and aseptic patients (35% vs 39%). Pre- and post-lavage synovial fluid WBC count were far more disparate in septic (53,553 vs 8,275 WBCs) and aseptic (1,103 vs 268 WBCs) cohorts. At a cutoff of 80% PMN, the post-lavage aspirate had a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 95%. At a cutoff of 3,000 WBCs, the post-lavage aspirate had a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 98%. As the post-lavage
Background. In the setting of a “dry” aspiration, saline lavage is commonly used to obtain a sample for analysis. The purpose of this study is to prospectively determine the impact of saline lavage on synovial fluid markers in revision arthroplasty. Methods. 79 patients undergoing revision hip (19) and knee (60) arthroplasty were enrolled. Intraoperatively, prior to arthrotomy, the maximum amount of fluid possible was aspirated to simulate a dry-tap (“pre-lavage”) followed by subsequent injection with 20 mL of normal saline and re-aspiration (“post-lavage”). Pre and post-lavage synovial white blood cell (WBC) count, percent polymorphonuclear cells (%PMN), and cultures were compared. Statistical analyses utilized the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results. Nine patients met modified MSIS criteria for prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Pre and post-lavage %PMN were similar in septic patients (90.1% vs. 88.2%, p=0.40 for septic). Pre and post-lavage WBC counts were different in both cohorts (69,432 vs. 6,547 WBCs, p=0.008 for septic; 1,850 vs. 449 WBCs for aseptic, p<0.001). Using a pre-lavage cutoff of >80% PMN, the post-lavage aspirate correctly identified 84.6% of true positives (sensitivity) and 98.5% of true negatives (specificity). Using a pre-lavage cutoff of >3000 WBCs, the post-lavage aspirate correctly identified only 38.1% of true positives (sensitivity). As the synovial fluid WBC count increased, the correlation between pre and post-lavage %PMN was stronger (mean difference of 7.0% PMN in WBC <3000 vs. mean difference −2.9% PMN in WBC >3000, p=0.002). Of seven positive pre-lavage fluid cultures, 4 remained positive post-lavage. Conclusion. While saline lavage aspiration significantly lowers the
It remains difficult to diagnose early postoperative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We aimed to validate the optimal cutoff values of ESR, CRP, and synovial fluid analysis for detecting early postoperative PJI in a large series of primary TKAs. We retrospectively identified 27,066 primary TKAs performed between 2000 and 2019. Within 12 weeks, 169 patients (170 TKAs) had an aspiration. The patients were divided into two groups: those evaluated ≤ six weeks, or between six and 12 weeks postoperatively. The 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI diagnosis in 22 TKAs. The mean follow-up was five years (two months to 17 years). The results were compared using medians and Mann-Whitney U tests and thresholds were analyzed using receiver operator characteristic curves.Aims
Methods
Satisfactory primary wound healing following
total joint replacement is essential. Wound healing problems can
have devastating consequences for patients. Assessment of their healing
capacity is useful in predicting complications. Local factors that
influence wound healing include multiple previous incisions, extensive
scarring, lymphoedema, and poor vascular perfusion. Systemic factors
include diabetes mellitus, inflammatory arthropathy, renal or liver
disease, immune compromise, corticosteroid therapy, smoking, and
poor nutrition. Modifications in the surgical technique are necessary
in selected cases to minimise potential wound complications. Prompt
and systematic intervention is necessary to address any wound healing
problems to reduce the risks of infection and other potential complications. Cite this article: