Aims. To establish the utility of adding the laboratory-based synovial alpha-defensin immunoassay to the traditional diagnostic work-up of a prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods. A group of four physicians evaluated 158 consecutive patients who were worked up for PJI, of which 94 underwent revision arthroplasty. Each physician reviewed the diagnostic data and decided on the presence of PJI according to the 2014 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria (yes, no, or undetermined). Their initial randomized review of the available data before or after surgery was blinded to each alpha-defensin result and a subsequent randomized review was conducted with each result. Multilevel logistic regression analysis assessed the effect of having the alpha-defensin result on the ability to diagnose PJI. Alpha-defensin was correlated to the number of synovial white blood cells (WBCs) and percentage of polymorphonuclear cells (%PMN). Results. Intraobserver reliability and interobserver agreement did not change when the alpha-defensin result was available. Positive alpha-defensin results had greater synovial WBCs (mean 31,854 cells/μL, SD 32,594) and %PMN (mean 93.0%, SD 5.5%) than negative alpha-defensin results (mean 974 cells/μL, SD 3,988; p < 0.001 and mean 39.4% SD 28.6%; p < 0.001). Adding the alpha-defensin result did not alter the diagnosis of a PJI using preoperative (odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 1.88; p = 0.315) or operative (OR 0.52, CI 0.18 to 1.55; p = 0.242) data when clinicians already decided that PJI was present or absent with traditionally available testing. However, when undetermined with traditional preoperative testing, alpha-defensin helped diagnose (OR 0.44, CI 0.30 to 0.64; p < 0.001) or rule out (OR 0.41, CI 0.17 to 0.98; p = 0.044) PJI. Of the 27 undecided cases with traditional testing, 24 (89%) benefited from the addition of alpha-defensin testing. Conclusion. The laboratory-based synovial alpha-defensin immunoassay did not help diagnose or rule out a PJI when added to routine serologies and synovial fluid analyses except in cases where the diagnosis of PJI was unclear. We recommend against the routine use of alpha-defensin and suggest using it only when traditional testing is indeterminate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(5):593–599

Aims

The primary aim was to assess the rate of postoperative COVID-19 following hip and knee arthroplasty performed in March 2020 in the UK. The secondary aims were to assess whether there were clinical factors associated with COVID-19 status, the mortality rate of patients with COVID-19, and the rate of potential COVID-19 in patients not presenting to healthcare services.

Aims

The EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire is a widely used multiattribute general health questionnaire where an EQ-5D < 0 defines a state ‘worse than death’ (WTD). The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of patients awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in a health state WTD and to identify associations with this state. Secondary aims were to examine the effect of WTD status on one-year outcomes.

Aims

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication of surgery with an incidence of about 1% in the United Kingdom. Sutures can lead to the development of a SSI, as micro-organisms can colonize the suture as it is implanted. Triclosan-coated sutures, being antimicrobical, were developed to reduce the rate of SSI. Our aim was to assess whether triclosan-coated sutures cause a reduction in SSIs following arthroplasty of the hip and knee.

Older patients with multiple medical co-morbidities are increasingly being offered and undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA). These patients are more likely to require intensive care support, following surgery. We prospectively evaluated the need for intensive care admission and intervention in a consecutive series of 738 patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty procedures. The mean age was 60.6 years (18 to 91; 440 women, 298 men. Risk factors, correlating with the need for critical care intervention, according to published guidelines, were analysed to identify high-risk patients who would benefit from post-operative critical care monitoring. A total of 50 patients (6.7%) in our series required critical care level interventions during their hospital stay. Six independent multivariate clinical predictors were identified (p < 0.001) including a history of congestive heart failure (odds ratio (OR) 24.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.51 to 61.91), estimated blood loss >  1000 mL (OR 17.36, 95% CI 5.36 to 56.19), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13.90, 95% CI 4.78 to 40.36), intra-operative use of vasopressors (OR 8.10, 95% CI 3.23 to 20.27), revision hip arthroplasty (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.04) and body mass index > 35 kg/m² (OR 2.70, 95% CI 123 to 5.94). The model was then validated against an independent, previously published data set of 1594 consecutive patients. The use of this risk stratification model can be helpful in predicting which high-risk patients would benefit from a higher level of monitoring and care after elective TJA and aid hospitals in allocating precious critical care resources.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1512–18.

We analysed data from the Oxford hip and knee questionnaires collected by the New Zealand Joint Registry at six months and five years after joint replacement, to determine if there was any relationship between the scores and the risk of early revision. Logistic regression of the six-month scores indicated that for every one-unit decrease in the Oxford score, the risk of revision within two years increased by 9.7% for total hip replacement (THR), 9.9% for total knee replacement (TKR) and 12.0% for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). Our findings showed that 70% of the revisions within two years for TKR and 67% for THR and UKR would have been captured by monitoring the lowest 22%, 28% and 28%, respectively, of the Oxford scores. When analysed using the Kalairajah classification a score of < 27 (poor) was associated with a risk of revision within two years of 7.6% for THR, 7.0% for TKR and 24.3% for UKR, compared with risks of 0.7%, 0.7% and 1.8%, respectively, for scores > 34 (good or excellent).

Our study confirms that the Oxford hip and knee scores at six months are useful predictors of early revision after THR and TKR and we recommend their use for the monitoring of the outcome and potential failure in these patients.