Aims. The aim of this paper was to present the clinical features of patients with musculoskeletal sources of methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) septicaemia. Patients and Methods. A total of 137 patients presented with MSSA septicaemia between 2012 and 2015. The primary source of infection was musculoskeletal in 48 patients (35%). Musculoskeletal infection was considered the primary source of septicaemia when endocarditis and other obvious sources were excluded. All patients with an arthroplasty at the time were evaluated for any prosthetic involvement. . Results. The most common site of infection was the spine, which occurred in 28 patients (58%), and was associated with abscess formation in 16. Back pain was the presenting symptom in these patients, with a positive predictive value of 100%. A total of 24 patients had a total of 42 arthroplasties of the hip or knee in situ. Prosthetic joint infection occurred in six of these patients (25%). In five patients, the infection originated outside the musculoskeletal system. Three patients (6%) with MSSA septicaemia from a musculoskeletal sources died. . Conclusion. Amongst the musculoskeletal sources of MSSA septicaemia, the spine was the most commonly involved. We recommend an MRI scan of the whole spine and pelvis in patients with MSSA septicaemia with back pain, when the primary source of infection has not been identified or clinical examination is unreliable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1545–51

Aims

The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence of culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) when adequate methods of culture are used, and to evaluate the outcome in patients who were treated with antibiotics for a culture-negative PJI compared with those in whom antibiotics were withheld.

The Department of Health and the Public Health Laboratory Service established the Nosocomial Infection National Surveillance Scheme in order to standardise the collection of information about infections acquired in hospital in the United Kingdom and provide national data with which hospitals could measure their own performance. The definition of superficial incisional infection (skin and subcutaneous tissue), set by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), should meet at least one of the defined criteria which would confirm the diagnosis and determine the need for specific treatment. We have assessed the interobserver reliability of the criteria for superficial incisional infection set by the CDC in our current practice. The incisional site of 50 patients who had an elective primary arthroplasty of the hip or knee was evaluated independently by two orthopaedic clinical research fellows and two orthopaedic ward sisters for the presence or absence of surgical-site infection. Interobserver reliability was assessed by comparison of the criteria for wound infection used by the four observers using kappa reliability coefficients. Our study demonstrated that some of the components of the current CDC criteria were unreliable and we recommend their revision

We have investigated in a prospective, randomised placebo-controlled study the effect of high-dose aprotinin on blood loss in patients admitted for major surgery (revision arthroplasty of the hip or knee, or for resection of a soft-tissue sarcoma). The mean intraoperative blood loss was reduced from 1957 ml in the control group to 736 ml in the aprotinin group (p = 0.002). The mean requirement for intraoperative homologous blood transfusion in the aprotinin group was 1.4 units (95% CI 0.2 to 2.7) and 3.1 units (95% CI 1.7 to 4.6) in the control group (p = 0.033). The mean length of hospital stay was reduced from 27.8 days in the control group to 17.6 days in the aprotinin group which was not statistically significant. The intraoperative use of aprotinin in major orthopaedic operations significantly reduced blood loss and the required amount of packed cells. It may result in a decrease in the length of hospital stay and costs

We have studied prospectively the outcome of wound discharge in patients after arthroplasty of the hip and knee. Over a period of 3.5 years 530 primary arthroplasties were carried out in one hospital. Postoperative wound infections developed in 82. At a mean follow-up of two years a comparison was made between these patients and 82 with healthy wounds, in terms of symptoms and signs of deep infection. There was an incidence of 1.1% of early deep infection, within six weeks in all cases. The rate of ‘superficial’ infection was 17.3% in the hips, 10.5% in the knees and 14.3% in total. At a mean follow-up of 26 months, there were no significant differences between the patients with infected wounds and a matched group of patients with healthy wounds in terms of the ESR, level of C-reactive protein, white cell count and radiological scores, but clinical scores were significantly worse in the patients with infected knees (p < 0.05). The length of stay was also significantly longer in this group (mean 14.6 days in the healthy wound group, 19 days in the problem group; p < 0.005). There was, however, no convincing evidence that these wound infections led to deep infection and early revision in the early to medium follow-up period. A larger and longer prospective trial would be necessary to shed more light on this potential problem

Drug therapy forms an integral part of the management of many orthopaedic conditions. However, many medicines can produce serious adverse reactions if prescribed inappropriately, either alone or in combination with other drugs. Often these hazards are not appreciated. In response to this, the European Union recently issued legislation regarding safety measures which member states must adopt to minimise the risk of errors of medication.

In March 2014 the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and NHS England released a Patient Safety Alert initiative focussed on errors of medication. There have been similar initiatives in the United States under the auspices of The National Coordinating Council for Medication Error and The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. These initiatives have highlighted the importance of informing and educating clinicians.

Here, we discuss common drug interactions and contra-indications in orthopaedic practice. This is germane to safe and effective clinical care.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:434–41.

Using a computer-based quality assurance program, we analysed peri-operative data on 160 patients undergoing one-stage bilateral hip or knee arthroplasties under regional anaesthesia with routine anaesthetic monitoring and only using peripheral intravenous access for peri-operative safety. We monitored defined intra-operative adverse events such as hypotension, myocardial ischaemia, arrhythmias, hypovolaemia, hypertension and early post-operative complications. We also determined post-operative hip and knee function, and patient satisfaction with different aspects of the anaesthetic management. Those patients undergoing one-stage bilateral arthroplasties were matched according to a cross-stratification which used three variables (American Society of Anesthesiologists’ physical status scoring system, age and joint replaced) to patients undergoing unilateral hip or knee arthroplasties. Serious intra-operative adverse events were, with the exception of intra-operative hypotension, very infrequent in patients undergoing bilateral (nine adverse events) as well as unilateral arthroplasties (five adverse events). Early post-operative complications were also infrequent in both groups. However, the risks of receiving a heterologous blood transfusion (odds ratio 2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 5.0, estimated by exact conditional logistic regression) or vasoactive drugs (odds ratio 3.9; 95% CI 2.0 to 7.8) were significantly greater for patients undergoing bilateral operations. Patient satisfaction with anaesthesia was high; all patients who underwent the one-stage bilateral operation would choose the same anaesthetic technique again.

We have prospectively studied the outcome of infections associated with implants which were retained and treated using a standardised antimicrobial protocol. Over a period of four years, we studied 24 consecutive patients who had symptoms of infection for less than one year, a stable implant, no sinus tract and a known pathogen which was susceptible to recommended antimicrobial agents. The infections involved hip prostheses (14), knee prostheses (5), an internal fixation device (4), and an ankle prosthesis (1).

Twenty patients had a successful outcome at a median follow-up of 3.7 years (1.8 to 4.7); four had failure of the implant after a median follow-up of 1.2 years (0.3 to 2.5). The probability of survival without failure of treatment was 96% at one year (95% confidence interval (CI) 88 to 100), 92% at two years (95% CI 80 to 100) and 86% at three years (95% CI 72 to 100).

Patients with a short-term infection but with a stable implant, no sinus tract and a known pathogen may be successfully treated by retention of the implant and the use of a standardised regimen of antimicrobial treatment.