Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 89-B, Issue 2 | Pages 281 - 282
1 Feb 2007
GRIMER RJ PHILLIPS JE CRANE TP NOY M ELLIOT TSJ


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 88-B, Issue 7 | Pages 943 - 948
1 Jul 2006
Phillips JE Crane TP Noy M Elliott TSJ Grimer RJ

The Control of Infection Committee at a specialist orthopaedic hospital prospectively collected data on all episodes of bacteriologically-proven deep infection arising after primary hip and knee replacements over a 15-year period from 1987 to 2001.

There were 10 735 patients who underwent primary hip or knee replacement. In 34 of 5947 hip replacements (0.57%) and 41 of 4788 knee replacements (0.86%) a deep infection developed. The most common infecting micro-organism was coagulase-negative staphylococcus, followed by Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci and streptococci. Of the infecting organisms, 72% were sensitive to routine prophylactic antimicrobial agents.

Of the infections, 29% (22) arose in the first three months following surgery, 35% between three months and one year (26), and 36% (27) after one year. Most cases were detected early and treated aggressively, with eradication of the infection in 96% (72). There was no significant change in the infection rate or type of infecting micro-organism over the course of this study.

These results set a benchmark, and importantly emphasise that only 64% of peri-prosthetic infections arise within one year of surgery. These results also illustrate the advantages of conducting joint replacement surgery in the isolation of a specialist hospital.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 85-B, Issue SUPP_II | Pages 104 - 104
1 Feb 2003
Abudu A Sivardeen KAZ Grimer RJ Noy M
Full Access

Deep prosthetic infections are a significant cause of failure after arthroplastic surgery. Superficial wound infections are a risk factor for deep infections. We aimed to quantify the risk of deep infection after superficial wound infections, and analyse the microbiology of organisms grown.

We defused Superficial Infection according to the definition used by the Centre for Disease Control, and Deep Infection according to the Swedish Hip Register. We retrospectively analysed the results of 6782 THR and TKRs performed consecutively from 1988–1998. We analysed patient records, radiology and microbiological data. The latter collected prospectively by our infection control team.

We identified 81 (1. 2%) superficial wound infections, however we had to exclude 3 due to poor follow-up. Of the 78 patients studied, mean age was 71 (23–89), 50 were female, 28 male, 41 THR, 37 TKR and follow-up was a mean 49 months (12–130). The majority (81%) of organisms grown in the superficial wound infections were gram positive Staphylococci. These organisms were most frequently sensitive to Erythromycin or Flucloxacillin. All the superficial infections were treated with antibiotics, 66% settled with less than 6 weeks therapy. Deep prosthetic infections occurred in 10% of superficial infections in both THR and TKR. In 80% of cases the organism in the superficial infection caused the deep infection. Wound dehiscence, haematoma, post-op pyrexia and patient risk factors had no affect on onset of deep infection. However patients who had a wound discharge with positive microbiology and those patients in whom there was clinical doubt about the diagnosis of deep infection and thus had antibiotic therapy for more than six weeks had increased risk of deep sepsis.