We investigated whether the indentation of bone
cement spacers used in revision of infected joint arthroplasty with a
MacDonald dissector increased the elution of antibiotic The fluid sampled at 72 hours from the indented discs containing
0.17 g gentamicin (0.88% w/w) contained a mean of 113 mcg/ml (90.12
to 143.5) compared with 44.5 mcg/ml (44.02 to 44.90) in the fluid
sampled from the plain discs (p = 0.012). In discs containing 0.33
g gentamicin (1.75% w/w), the concentration eluted from the indented discs
at 72 hours was a mean of 316 mcg/ml (223 to 421) compared with
a mean of 118 mcg/ml (100 to 140) from the plain discs (p <
0.001). At two weeks, these significant differences persisted. At nine
weeks the indented discs eluted a greater concentration for all
gentamicin doses, but the difference was only significant for the
discs containing 0.17 g (0.88% w/w, p = 0.006). However if the area
under the curve is taken as a measure of the total antibiotic eluted,
the indented discs eluted more gentamicin than the plain discs for
the 0.17 g (0.88% w/w, p = 0.031), the 0.25 g (1.41% w/w, p <
0.001) and the 0.33 g (1.75% w/w, p <
0.001) discs. When preparing antibiotic spacers for use in staged revision
arthroplasty surgery we recommend indenting the spacer with a MacDonald
dissector to increase the elution of antibiotic. Cite this article:
Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) are complex procedures with higher rates of re-revision, complications, and mortality compared to primary TKA and THA. We report the effects of the establishment of a revision arthroplasty network (the East Midlands Specialist Orthopaedic Network; EMSON) on outcomes of rTKA and rTHA. The revision arthroplasty network was established in January 2015 and covered five hospitals in the Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire areas of the East Midlands of England. This comprises a collaborative weekly multidisciplinary meeting where upcoming rTKA and rTHA procedures are discussed, and a plan agreed. Using the Hospital Episode Statistics database, revision procedures carried out between April 2011 and March 2018 (allowing two-year follow-up) from the five network hospitals were compared to all other hospitals in England. Age, sex, and mean Hospital Frailty Risk scores were used as covariates. The primary outcome was re-revision surgery within one year of the index revision. Secondary outcomes were re-revision surgery within two years, any complication within one and two years, and median length of hospital stay.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-sectional, observational cohort study of patients presenting for revision of a total hip, or total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, to understand current routes to revision surgery and explore differences in symptoms, healthcare use, reason for revision, and the revision surgery (surgical time, components, length of stay) between patients having regular follow-up and those without. Data were collected from participants and medical records for the 12 months prior to revision. Patients with previous revision, metal-on-metal articulations, or hip hemiarthroplasty were excluded. Participants were retrospectively classified as ‘Planned’ or ‘Unplanned’ revision. Multilevel regression and propensity score matching were used to compare the two groups.Aims
Methods
To investigate whether chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with the risk of all-cause revision or revision due to a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary hip or knee arthroplasty. This retrospective cohort study comprised 18,979 consecutive hip and knee arthroplasties from a single high-volume academic hospital. At a median of 5.6 years (interquartile range (IQR) 3.5 to 8.1), all deaths and revisions were counted. To overcome the competing risk of death, competing risk analysis using the cumulative incidence function (CIF) was applied to analyze the association between different stages of CKD and revisions. Confounding factors such as diabetes and BMI were considered using either a stratified CIF or the Fine and Gray model.Aims
Methods
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. A retrospective analysis between 2009 and 2016 included 51 patients with CN PJI who underwent single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion; these were compared with 192 culture-positive (CP) patients. CN patients were treated according to a protocol including intravenous vancomycin and a direct intra-articular infusion of imipenem and vancomycin alternately used in the morning and afternoon. In the CP patients, pathogen-sensitive intravenous (IV) antibiotics were administered for a mean of 16 days (12 to 21), and for resistant cases, additional intra-articular antibiotics were used. The infection healing rate, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score were compared between CN and CP groups.Aims
Methods
Positive cultures are not uncommon in cases of revision total
knee and hip arthroplasty (TKA and THA) for presumed aseptic causes.
The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence of positive
intra-operative cultures in presumed aseptic revision of TKA and
THA, and to determine whether the presence of intra-operative positive cultures
results in inferior survival in such cases. A retrospective cohort study was assembled with 679 patients
undergoing revision knee (340 cases) or hip arthroplasty (339 cases)
for presumed aseptic causes. For all patients three or more separate
intra-operative cultures were obtained. Patients were diagnosed
with a previously unsuspected prosthetic joint infection (PJI) if two
or more cultures were positive with the same organism. Records were
reviewed for demographic details, pre-operative laboratory results
and culture results. The primary outcome measure was infection-free
implant survival at two years.Aims
Patients and Methods
Allografts of bone from the femoral head are often used in orthopaedic procedures. Although the donated heads are thoroughly tested microscopically before release by the bone bank, some surgeons take additional cultures in the operating theatre before implantation. There is no consensus about the need to take these cultures. We retrospectively assessed the clinical significance of the implantation of positive-cultured bone allografts. The contamination rate at retrieval of the allografts was 6.4% in our bone bank. Intra-operative cultures were taken from 426 femoral head allografts before implantation; 48 (11.3%) had a positive culture. The most frequently encountered micro-organism was coagulase-negative staphylococcus. Deep infection occurred in two of the 48 patients (4.2%). In only one was it likely that the same micro-organism caused the contamination and the subsequent infection. In our study, the rate of infection in patients receiving positive-cultured allografts at implantation was not higher than the overall rate of infection in allograft surgery suggesting that the positive cultures at implantation probably represent contamination and that the taking of additional cultures is not useful.
