Aims. Gram-negative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been poorly studied despite its rapidly increasing incidence. Treatment with one-stage revision using intra-articular (IA) infusion of antibiotics may offer a reasonable alternative with a distinct advantage of providing a means of delivering the drug in high concentrations. Carbapenems are regarded as the last line of defense against severe Gram-negative or polymicrobial infection. This study presents the results of one-stage revision using intra-articular carbapenem infusion for treating Gram-negative PJI, and analyzes the characteristics of bacteria distribution and drug sensitivity. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 32 patients (22 hips and 11 knees) who underwent single-stage revision combined with IA carbapenem infusion between November 2013 and March 2020. The IA and intravenous (IV) carbapenem infusions were administered for a single Gram-negative infection, and IV vancomycin combined with IA carbapenems and vancomycin was applied for polymicrobial infection including Gram-negative bacteria. The bacterial community distribution, drug sensitivity, infection control rate, functional recovery, and complications were evaluated. Reinfection or death caused by PJI was regarded as a treatment failure. Results. Gram-negative PJI was mainly caused by Escherichia coli (8/34), Enterobacter cloacae (7/34), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (5/34). Seven cases (7/32) involved polymicrobial PJIs. The resistance rates of penicillin, cephalosporin, quinolones, and sulfonamides were > 10%, and all penicillin and partial cephalosporins (first and second generation) were > 30%. Of 32 cases, treatment failed to eradicate infection in only three cases (9.4%), at a mean follow-up of 55.1 months (SD 25 to 90). The mean postoperative Harris Hip Score and Hospital for Special Surgery knee score at the most recent follow-up were 81 (62 to 91) and 79 (56 to 89), respectively. One patient developed a fistula, and another presented with a local rash on an infected joint. Conclusion. The use of IA carbapenem delivered alongside one-stage revision effectively controlled Gram-negative infection and obtained acceptable clinical outcomes with few complications. Notably, first- and second-generation cephalosporins and penicillin should be administrated with caution, due to a high incidence of resistance. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):284–293

We reviewed systematically the published evidence on the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for the reduction of wound infection in patients undergoing total hip and total knee replacement. Publications were identified using the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. We also contacted authors to identify unpublished trials. We included randomised controlled trials which compared any prophylaxis with none, the administration of systemic antibiotics with that of those in cement, cephalosporins with glycopeptides, cephalosporins with penicillin-derivatives, and second-generation with first-generation cephalosporins. A total of 26 studies (11 343 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was variable. In a meta-analysis of seven studies (3065 participants) antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the absolute risk of wound infection by 8% and the relative risk by 81% compared with no prophylaxis (p < 0.00001). No other comparison showed a significant difference in clinical effect. Antibiotic prophylaxis should be routine in joint replacement but the choice of agent should be made on the basis of cost and local availability

Aims

It can be extremely challenging to determine whether to perform reimplantation in patients who have contradictory serum inflammatory markers and frozen section results. We investigated whether patients with a positive frozen section at reimplantation were at a higher risk of reinfection despite normal ESR and CRP.

Aims

Biopsy of the periprosthetic tissue is an important diagnostic tool for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as it enables the detection of the responsible microorganism with its sensitivity to antibiotics. We aimed to investigate how often the bacteria identified in the tissue analysis differed between samples obtained from preoperative biopsy and intraoperative revision surgery in cases of late PJI; and whether there was a therapeutic consequence.

Aims

In the absence of an identified organism, single-stage revision is contraindicated in prosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, no studies have examined the use of intra-articular antibiotics in combination with single-stage revision in these cases. In this study, we present the results of single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion for treating culture-negative (CN) PJI.

Aims

To investigate the bone penetration of intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis with flucloxacillin and gentamicin during hip and knee arthroplasty, and their efficacy against Staphylococcus (S.) aureus and S. epidermidis.

Antibiotic prophylaxis is routinely administered during joint replacement surgery and may predispose patients to Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD). The primary aim of this study was to determine the incidence of this following joint replacement, using a cefuroxime-based regimen. Patients developing CDAD were compared with a control group of patients without CDAD. The incidence of the former was 1.7 per 1000 primary joint replacements. Those patients prescribed additional antibiotics had a higher incidence of CDAD (p = 0.047), but there was no difference between the two groups in relation to the use of gastroprotective agents (p = 0.703). A trial of a new prophylaxis regimen would require 43 198 patients in each arm to show a reduction of one case per 1000 procedures. Cefuroxime-based antibiotic prophylaxis is safe in patients undergoing primary elective joint replacement.

Whether patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria should be investigated and treated before elective hip and knee replacement is controversial, although it is a widespread practice. We conducted a prospective observational cohort study with urine analyses before surgery and three days post-operatively. Patients with symptomatic urinary infections or an indwelling catheter were excluded. Post-discharge surveillance included questionnaires to patients and general practitioners at three months. Among 510 patients (309 women and 201 men), with a median age of 69 years (16 to 97) undergoing lower limb joint replacements (290 hips and 220 knees), 182 (36%) had pre-operative asymptomatic bacteriuria, mostly due to Escherichia coli, and 181 (35%) had white cells in the urine. Most patients (95%) received a single intravenous peri-operative dose (1.5 g) of cefuroxime as prophylaxis. On the third post-operative day urinary analysis identified white cells in 99 samples (19%) and bacteriuria in 208 (41%). Pathogens in the cultures on the third post-operative day were different from those in the pre-operative samples in 260 patients (51%). Only 25 patients (5%) developed a symptomatic urinary infection during their stay or in a subsequent three-month follow-up period, and two thirds of organisms identified were unrelated to those found during the admission. All symptomatic infections were successfully treated with oral antibiotics with no perceived effect on the joint replacement.

We conclude that testing and treating asymptomatic urinary tract colonisation before joint replacement is unnecessary.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:390–4.

We have investigated the contaminating bacteria in primary hip arthroplasty and their sensitivity to the prophylactic antibiotics currently in use. Impressions (627) of the gloved hands of the surgical team in 50 total hip arthroplasties were obtained on blood agar. The gloves were changed after draping, at intervals of 20 minutes thereafter, and before using cement. Changes were also undertaken whenever a visible puncture was detected. The culture plates were incubated at 37°C for 48 hours. Isolates were identified and tested for sensitivity to flucloxacillin, which is a recognised indicator of sensitivity to cefuroxime. They were also tested against other agents depending upon their appearance on Gram staining.

We found contamination in 57 (9%) impressions and 106 bacterial isolates. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were seen most frequently (68.9%), but we also isolated Micrococcus (12.3%), diphtheroids (9.4%), Staphylococcus aureus (6.6%) and Escherichia coli (0.9%). Of the coagulase-negative staphylococci, only 52.1% were sensitive to flucloxacillin and therefore to cefuroxime. We believe that it is now appropriate to review the relevance of prophylaxis with cefuroxime and to consider the use of other agents.

We hypothesised there was no clinical value in using an autologous blood transfusion (ABT) drain in either primary total hip (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) in terms of limiting allogeneic blood transfusions when a modern restrictive blood management regime was followed. A total of 575 patients (65.2% men), with a mean age of 68.9 years (36 to 94) were randomised in this three-arm study to no drainage (group A), or to wound drainage with an ABT drain for either six hours (group B) or 24 hours (group C). The primary outcome was the number of patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion. Secondary outcomes were post-operative haemoglobin (Hb) levels, length of hospital stay and adverse events.

This study identified only 41 transfused patients, with no significant difference in distribution between the three groups (p = 0.857). The mean pre-operative haemoglobin (Hb) value in the transfused group was 12.8 g/dL (9.8 to 15.5) versus 14.3 g/dL (10.6 to 18.0) in the non-transfused group (p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval: 1.08 to 1.86). Post-operatively, the median of re-transfused shed blood in patients with a THR was 280 mL (Interquartile range (IQR) 150 to 400) and in TKR patients 500 mL (IQR 350 to 650) (p <  0.001). ABT drains had no effect on the proportion of transfused patients in primary THR and TKR. The secondary outcomes were also comparable between groups.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:765–71.

Rivaroxaban has been recommended for routine use as a thromboprophylactic agent in patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty. However, trials supporting its use have not fully evaluated the risks of wound complications. This study of 1048 total hip/knee replacements records the rates of return to theatre and infection before and after the change from a low molecular weight heparin (tinzaparin) to rivaroxaban as the agent of chemical thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty. During a period of 13 months, 489 consecutive patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty received tinzaparin and the next 559 consecutive patients received rivaroxaban as thromboprophylaxis.

Nine patients in the control (tinzaparin) group (1.8%, 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 3.5) returned to theatre with wound complications within 30 days, compared with 22 patients in the rivaroxaban group (3.94%, 95% confidence interval 2.6 to 5.9). This increase was statistically significant (p = 0.046). The proportion of patients who returned to theatre and became infected remained similar (p = 0.10).

Our study demonstrates the need for further randomised controlled clinical trials to be conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban in clinical practice, focusing on the surgical complications as well as the potential prevention of venous thromboembolism.

Implantation of allograft bone is an integral part of revision surgery of the hip. One major concern with its use is the risk of transmission of infective agents. There are a number of methods of processing allograft bone in order to reduce this risk. One method requires washing the tissue using pulsed irrigation immediately before implantation. We report the incidence of deep bacterial infection in 138 patients (144 revision hip arthroplasties) who had undergone implantation of allograft bone. The bone used was fresh-frozen, non-irradiated and pulse-washed with normal saline before implantation. The deep infection rate at a minimum follow-up of one year was 0.7%. This method of processing appears to be associated with a very low risk of allograft-related bacterial infection.