Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 5 | Pages 660 - 665
1 May 2016
Jung HJ Song JH Kekatpure AL Adikrishna A Hong HP Lee WJ Chun JM Jeon IH

Aims

The treatment of septic arthritis of the shoulder is challenging. The infection frequently recurs and the clinical outcome can be very poor. We aimed to review the outcomes following the use of continuous negative pressure after open debridement with a large diameter drain in patients with septic arthritis of the shoulder.

Patients and Methods

A total of 68 consecutive patients with septic arthritis of the shoulder underwent arthrotomy, irrigation and debridement. A small diameter suction drain was placed in the glenohumeral joint and a large diameter drain was placed in the subacromial space with continuous negative pressure of 15 cm H2O. All patients received a standardised protocol of antibiotics for a mean of 5.1 weeks (two to 11.1).


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 7 | Pages 976 - 983
1 Jul 2016
Streubel PN Simone JP Morrey BF Sanchez-Sotelo J Morrey ME

Aims

We describe the use of a protocol of irrigation and debridement (I& D) with retention of the implant for the treatment of periprosthetic infection of a total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). This may be an attractive alternative to staged re-implantation.

Patients and Methods

Between 1990 and 2010, 23 consecutive patients were treated in this way. Three were lost to follow-up leaving 20 patients (21 TEAs) in the study. There were six men and 14 women. Their mean age was 58 years (23 to 76). The protocol involved: component unlinking, irrigation and debridement (I& D), and the introduction of antibiotic laden cement beads; organism-specific intravenous antibiotics; repeat I& D and re-linkage of the implant if appropriate; long-term oral antibiotic therapy.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1681 - 1686
1 Dec 2013
Peach CA Nicoletti S Lawrence TM Stanley D

We report our experience of staged revision surgery for the treatment of infected total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Between 1998 and 2010 a consecutive series of 33 patients (34 TEAs) underwent a first-stage procedure with the intention to proceed to second-stage procedure when the infection had been controlled. A single first-stage procedure with removal of the components and cement was undertaken for 29 TEAs (85%), followed by the insertion of antibiotic-impregnated cement beads, and five (15%) required two or more first-stage procedures. The most common organism isolated was coagulase-negative Staphylococcus in 21 TEAs (62%).

A second-stage procedure was performed for 26 TEAs (76%); seven patients (seven TEAs, 21%) had a functional resection arthroplasty with antibiotic beads in situ and had no further surgery, one had a persistent discharge preventing further surgery.

There were three recurrent infections (11.5%) in those patients who underwent a second-stage procedure. The infection presented at a mean of eight months (5 to 10) post-operatively. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) in those who underwent a second stage revision without recurrent infection was 81.1 (65 to 95).

Staged revision surgery is successful in the treatment of patients with an infected TEA and is associated with a low rate of recurrent infection. However, when infection does occur, this study would suggest that it becomes apparent within ten months of the second stage procedure.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1681–6.