The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of α defensin (AD) lateral flow assay (LFA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in comparison to conventional synovial white blood cell (WBC) count and polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%) analysis. Patients undergoing joint aspiration for evaluation of pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) were considered for inclusion. Synovial fluids from 99 patients (25 THA and 74 TKA) were analyzed by WBC count and PMN% analysis, AD LFA, and AD ELISA. WBC and PMN% cutoffs of ≥ 1,700 cells/mm3 and ≥ 65% for TKA and ≥ 3,000 cells/mm3 and ≥ 80% for THA were used, respectively. A panel of three physicians, all with expertise in orthopaedic infections and who were blinded to the results of AD tests, independently reviewed patient data to diagnose subjects as with or without PJI. Consensus PJI classification was used as the reference standard to evaluate test performances. Results were compared using McNemar’s test and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis.Aims
Methods
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
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the
effect of various non-operative modalities of treatment (transcutaneous
electrical nerve stimulation (TENS); neuromuscular electrical stimulation
(NMES); insoles and bracing) on the pain of osteoarthritis (OA)
of the knee. We conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting
Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify
the therapeutic options which are commonly adopted for the management
of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. The outcome measurement tools used in the different studies were
the visual analogue scale and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities
Arthritis Index pain index: all pain scores were converted to a
100-point scale. A total of 30 studies met our inclusion criteria: 13 on insoles,
seven on TENS, six on NMES, and four on bracing. The standardised
mean difference (SMD) in pain after treatment with TENS was 1.796,
which represented a significant reduction in pain. The significant
overall effect estimate for NMES on pain was similar to that of
TENS, with a SMD of 1.924. The overall effect estimate of insoles
on pain was a SMD of 0.992. The overall effect of bracing showed
a significant reduction in pain of 1.34. Overall, all four non-operative modalities of treatment were
found to have a significant effect on the reduction of pain in OA
of the knee. This study shows that non-operative physical modalities of treatment
are of benefit when treating OA of the knee. However, much of the
literature reviewed evaluates studies with follow-up of less than
six months: future work should aim to evaluate patients with longer
follow-up. Cite this article:
The Unified Classification System (UCS) was introduced
because of a growing need to have a standardised universal classification
system of periprosthetic fractures. It combines and simplifies many
existing classification systems, and can be applied to any fracture
around any partial or total joint replacement occurring during or
after operation. Our goal was to assess the inter- and intra-observer
reliability of the UCS in association with knee replacement when
classifying fractures affecting one or more of the femur, tibia
or patella. We used an international panel of ten orthopaedic surgeons with
subspecialty fellowship training and expertise in adult hip and
knee reconstruction (‘experts’) and ten residents of orthopaedic
surgery in the last two years of training (‘pre-experts’). They
each received 15 radiographs for evaluation. After six weeks they
evaluated the same radiographs again but in a different order. The reliability was assessed using the Kappa and weighted Kappa
values. The Kappa values for inter-observer reliability for the experts
and the pre-experts were 0.741 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.707
to 0.774) and 0.765 (95% CI 0.733 to 0.797), respectively. The weighted
Kappa values for intra-observer reliability for the experts and
pre-experts were 0.898 (95% CI 0.846 to 0.950) and 0.878 (95% CI
0.815 to 0.942) respectively. The UCS has substantial inter-observer reliability and ‘near
perfect’ intra-observer reliability when used for periprosthetic
fractures in association with knee replacement in the hands of experienced
and inexperienced users. Cite this article:
