Objectives. We wanted to investigate regional variations in the organisms
reported to be causing
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating
complication for patients and results in greatly increased costs
of care for both healthcare providers and patients. More than 15
500 revision hip and knee procedures were recorded in England, Wales
and Northern Ireland in 2013, with infection accounting for 13%
of revision hip and 23% of revision knee procedures. We report our experience of using antibiotic eluting absorbable
calcium sulphate beads in 15 patients (eight men and seven women
with a mean age of 64.8 years; 41 to 83) as part of a treatment
protocol for PJI in revision arthroplasty. The mean follow-up was 16 months (12 to 22). We report the outcomes
and complications, highlighting the risk of hypercalcaemia which
occurred in three patients. We recommend that serum levels of calcium be routinely sought
following the implantation of absorbable calcium sulphate beads
in orthopaedic surgery. Cite this article:
Fungal
Antibiotic prophylaxis is routinely administered during joint replacement surgery and may predispose patients to
We reviewed systematically the published evidence on the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for the reduction of wound infection in patients undergoing total hip and total knee replacement. Publications were identified using the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. We also contacted authors to identify unpublished trials. We included randomised controlled trials which compared any prophylaxis with none, the administration of systemic antibiotics with that of those in cement, cephalosporins with glycopeptides, cephalosporins with penicillin-derivatives, and second-generation with first-generation cephalosporins. A total of 26 studies (11 343 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was variable. In a meta-analysis of seven studies (3065 participants) antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the absolute risk of wound infection by 8% and the relative risk by 81% compared with no prophylaxis (p <
0.00001). No other comparison showed a significant difference in clinical effect. Antibiotic prophylaxis should be routine in joint replacement but the choice of agent should be made on the basis of cost and local availability.