The treatment of fracture-related infections (FRI) focuses on obtaining fracture healing and eradicating infection to prevent osteomyelitis. Treatment guidelines include removal, exchange, or retention of the implants used according to the stability of the fracture and the time from the infection. Infection of a fracture in the process of healing with a stable fixation may be treated with implant retention, debridement, and antibiotics. Nonetheless, the retention of an intramedullary nail is a potential risk factor for failure, and it is recommended to exchange or remove the nail. This surgical approach implies additional life-threatening risks in elderly fragile hip fracture patients. Our study aimed to analyze the results of implant retention for the treatment of infected nails in elderly hip fracture patients. Our retrospective analysis included patients 65 years of age or older with an acute fracture-related infection treated with implant retention from 2012 to 2020 in 6 Spanish hospitals with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients that required open reduction during the initial fracture surgery were excluded. Variables included in our analysis were patient demographics, type of fracture, date of FRI diagnosis, causative microorganism, and outcome. Treatment success was defined as fracture healing with infection eradication without the need for further hospitalization.Aim
Methods
Acute septic arthritis of the knee may be a challenging diagnosis in the emergency department and must always be excluded in any patient with knee pain and local or systemic signs of infection. Arthrocentesis of the suspected knee is mandatory, since the analysis of the synovial fluid gives useful information like the white blood cell count (WBC)/mm3 or the polymorphonuclear cell percentage (PMP). These parameters will help the clinician to make the decision to drain the joint in the operation room, without having to wait for the culture or Gram stain, which may take several days to be available. The classical cutoff of 50,000 WBC/mm3 with more than 90% of PMP may fail to include all the septic arthritis of the knee, since significant variation have been described in recent years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of WBC/mm3 and PMP in the synovial fluid in the diagnosis of acute septic arthritis of the knee. We reviewed the clinical data of patients diagnosed with acute septic arthritis of the knee admitted in our center between January 2010 and December 2014, specifically the WBC/mm3 and the PMP of the synovial joint fluid. The criteria for diagnosis of an acute septic arthritis of the knee was report of purulent material when arhtrotomy or arthroscopy was performed or a positive culture of the joint fluid. The statistical evaluation of the results was performed using Student's t-test. 48 patients matched the inclusion criteria. The mean WBC/mm3 was 44.333 (14.610–182.640) and the mean PMP was 91,89% (86,4%–98,1%). 28 patients (58,33%) had a WBC/mm3 below 50.000 and 44 patients (91,67%) had a PMP above 90%, both with no statistical significance. Knee arthrocentesis is mandatory in every patient suspected to have an acute knee pyoarthrosis, since the joint fluid analysis may show several abnormal findings. Our results show that a considerable number of patients may show a relatively low WBC/mm3 in the joint fluid in the presence of a knee pyoarthrosis. The PMP may be a better criteria, but again failed to achieve statistical significance, probably because of the low number of patients. The synovial fluid analysis alone is probably misleading in the diagnosis of an acute septic arthritis of the knee if the clinician is guided by the classical guidelines. The physical examination, medical history, laboratory and imagiologic tests are all key elements in this challenging diagnosis.
