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.

Aims

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are among the most devastating complications after joint arthroplasty. There is limited evidence on the efficacy of different antiseptic solutions on reducing biofilm burden. The purpose of the present study was to test the efficacy of different antiseptic solutions against clinically relevant microorganisms in biofilm.

Aims

Preoperative nasal Staphylococcus aureus screening and eradication reduces surgical site infections (SSIs) but its impact on reducing early prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. This study aims to assess the effect of preoperative nasal S. aureus screening and eradication on the incidence of early PJI in general and S. aureus-induced early PJI.

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.

We carried out a blinded prospective randomised controlled trial comparing 2-octylcyanoacrylate (OCA), subcuticular suture (monocryl) and skin staples for skin closure following total hip and total knee arthroplasty. We included 102 hip replacements and 85 of the knee.

OCA was associated with less wound discharge in the first 24 hours for both the hip and the knee. However, with total knee replacement there was a trend for a more prolonged wound discharge with OCA. With total hip replacement there was no significant difference between the groups for either early or late complications. Closure of the wound with skin staples was significantly faster than with OCA or suture. There was no significant difference in the length of stay in hospital, Hollander wound evaluation score (cosmesis) or patient satisfaction between the groups at six weeks for either hips or knees.

We consider that skin staples are the skin closure of choice for both hip and knee replacements.

Since the introduction of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines on thromboprophylaxis and the use of extended thromboprophylaxis with new oral agents, there have been reports of complications arising as a result of their use. We have looked at the incidence of wound complications after the introduction of dabigatran for thromboprophylaxis in our unit.

We investigated the rate of venous thromboembolism and wound leakage in 1728 patients undergoing primary joint replacement, both before and after the introduction of dabigatran, and following its subsequent withdrawal from our unit.

We found that the use of dabigatran led to a significant increase in post-operative wound leakage (20% with dabigatran, 5% with a multimodal regimen; p < 0.001), which also resulted in an increased duration of hospital stay. The rate of thromboembolism in patients receiving dabigatran was higher (1.3%) than in those receiving the multimodal thromboprophylaxis regimen, including low molecular weight heparin as an inpatient and the extended use of aspirin (0.3%, p = 0.047). We have ceased the use of dabigatran for thromboprophylaxis in these patients.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:122–6.

In our department we use an enhanced recovery protocol for joint replacement of the lower limb. This incorporates the use of intravenous tranexamic acid (IVTA; 15 mg/kg) at the induction of anaesthesia. Recently there was a national shortage of IVTA for 18 weeks; during this period all patients received an oral preparation of tranexamic acid (OTA; 25 mg/kg). This retrospective study compares the safety (surgical and medical complications) and efficacy (reduction of transfusion requirements) of OTA and IVTA. During the study period a total of 2698 patients received IVTA and 302 received OTA. After adjusting for a range of patient and surgical factors, the odds ratio (OR) of receiving a blood transfusion was significantly higher with IVTA than with OTA (OR 0.48 (95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.89), p = 0.019), whereas the safety profile was similar, based on length of stay, rate of readmission, return to theatre, deep infection, stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, myocardial infarction, pneumonia, deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The financial benefit of OTA is £2.04 for a 70 kg patient; this is amplified when the cost saving associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions is considered.

Although the number of patients in the study is modest, this work supports the use of OTA, and we recommend that a randomised trial be undertaken to compare the different methods of administering tranexamic acid.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1556–61.

Infection remains a significant and common complication after joint replacement and there is debate about which contributing factors are important. Few studies have investigated the effect of the operating time on infection.

We collected data prospectively from 5277 hip and knee replacements which included the type of procedure, the operating time, the use of drains, the operating theatre, surgeon, age and gender. In a subgroup of 3449 knee replacements further analysis was carried out using the tourniquet time in place of the operating time. These variables were assessed by the use of generalised linear modelling against superficial, deep or joint-space post-operative infection as defined by the Australian Surgical-Site Infection criteria.

The overall infection rate was 0.98%. In the replacement data set both male gender (z = 3.097, p = 0.00195) and prolonged operating time (z = 4.325, p < 0.001) were predictive of infection. In the knee subgroup male gender (z = 2.250, p = 0.02447), a longer tourniquet time (z = 2.867, p = 0.00414) and total knee replacement (versus unicompartmental knee replacement) (z = −2.052, p = 0.0420) were predictive of infection.

These findings support the view that a prolonged operating time and male gender are associated with an increased incidence of infection. Steps to minimise intra-operative delay should be instigated, and care should be exercised when introducing measures which prolong the duration of joint replacement.

The routine use of surgical drains in total hip arthroplasty remains controversial. They have not been shown to decrease the rate of wound infection significantly and can provide a retrograde route for it. Their use does not reduce the size or incidence of post-operative wound haematomas. This prospective, randomised study was designed to evaluate the role of drains in routine total hip arthroplasty.

We investigated 552 patients (577 hips) undergoing unilateral or bilateral total hip arthroplasty who had been randomised to either having a drain for 24 hours or not having a drain. All patients followed standardised pre-, intra-, and post-operative regimes and were independently assessed using the Harris hip score before operation and at six, 18 and 36 months follow-up.

The rate of superficial and deep infection was 2.9% and 0.4%, respectively, in the drained group and 4.8% and 0.7%, respectively in the undrained group. One patient in the undrained group had a haematoma which did not require drainage or transfusion. The rate of transfusion after operation in the drained group was significantly higher than for undrained procedures (p < 0.042). The use of a drain did not influence the post-operative levels of haemoglobin, the revision rates, Harris hip scores, the length of hospital stay or the incidence of thromboembolism. We conclude that drains provide no clear advantage at total hip arthroplasty, represent an additional cost, and expose patients to a higher risk of transfusion.