We retrospectively reviewed 30 two-stage revision procedures in 28 patients performed for fungal peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after a primary total knee replacement. Patients were followed for at least two years or until the infection recurred. The mean follow-up for patients who remained free of infection was 4.3 years (2.3 to 6.1). Overall, 17 patients were assessed as American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 3 or 4. The surgical protocol included removal of the infected implant, vigorous debridement and insertion of an articulating cement spacer. This was followed by at least six weeks of antimicrobial treatment and delayed reimplantation in all patients. The mean interval between removal of the prosthesis and reimplantation was 9.5 weeks (6 to 24). After reimplantation, patients took antifungal agents orally for a maximum of six months. Two knees became reinfected at one and two months post-operatively, respectively: one of these subsequently required arthrodesis because of uncontrolled infection.

Fungal PJIs can be treated successfully by removal of all infected material, appropriate antimicrobial treatment and delayed reimplantation.

The rate of peri-prosthetic infection following total joint replacement continues to rise, and attempts to curb this trend have included the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement at the time of primary surgery. We have investigated the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of the use of antibiotic-loaded cement for primary total knee replacement (TKR) by comparing the rate of infection in 3048 TKRs performed without loaded cement over a three-year period versus the incidence of infection after 4830 TKRs performed with tobramycin-loaded cement over a later period of time of a similar duration. In order to adjust for confounding factors, the rate of infection in 3347 and 4702 uncemented total hip replacements (THR) performed during the same time periods, respectively, was also examined. There were no significant differences in the characteristics of the patients in the different cohorts.

The absolute rate of infection increased when antibiotic-loaded cement was used in TKR. However, this rate of increase was less than the rate of increase in infection following uncemented THR during the same period. If the rise in the rate of infection observed in THR were extrapolated to the TKR cohort, 18 additional cases of infection would have been expected to occur in the cohort receiving antibiotic-loaded cement, compared with the number observed. Depending on the type of antibiotic-loaded cement that is used, its cost in all primary TKRs ranges between USD $2112.72 and USD $112 606.67 per case of infection that is prevented.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:65–9.

Objectives

The objective of this study is to determine an optimal antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) for infection prophylaxis in total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

Two-stage exchange remains the gold standard for treatment of peri-prosthetic joint infection after total hip replacement (THR). In the first stage, all components and associated cement if present are removed, an aggressive debridement is undertaken including a complete synovectomy, and an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer is put in place. Patients are then treated with six weeks of parenteral antibiotics, followed by an ‘antibiotic free period’ to help ensure the infection has been eradicated. If the clinical evaluation and serum inflammatory markers suggest the infection has resolved, then the second stage can be completed, which involves removal of the cement spacer, repeat debridement, and placement of a new THR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:84–7

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: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1237–41.

Louis Pasteur once said that: “Fortune favours the prepared mind.” As one of the great scientists who contributed to the fight against infection, he emphasised the importance of being prepared at all times to recognise infection and deal with it. Despite the many scientific discoveries and technological advances, such as the advent of antibiotics and the use of sterile techniques, infection continues to be a problem that haunts orthopaedic surgeons and inflicts suffering on patients.

The medical community has implemented many practices with the intention of preventing infection and treating it effectively when it occurs. Although high-level evidence may support some of these practices, many are based on little to no scientific foundation. Thus, around the world, there is great variation in practices for the prevention and management of periprosthetic joint infection.

This paper summaries the instigation, conduct and findings of a recent International Consensus Meeting on Surgical Site and Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1450–2.

The treatment of peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the ankle is not standardised. It is not clear whether an algorithm developed for hip and knee PJI can be used in the management of PJI of the ankle. We evaluated the outcome, at two or more years post-operatively, in 34 patients with PJI of the ankle, identified from a cohort of 511 patients who had undergone total ankle replacement. Their median age was 62.1 years (53.3 to 68.2), and 20 patients were women. Infection was exogenous in 28 (82.4%) and haematogenous in six (17.6%); 19 (55.9%) were acute infections and 15 (44.1%) chronic. Staphylococci were the cause of 24 infections (70.6%). Surgery with retention of one or both components was undertaken in 21 patients (61.8%), both components were replaced in ten (29.4%), and arthrodesis was undertaken in three (8.8%). An infection-free outcome with satisfactory function of the ankle was obtained in 23 patients (67.6%). The best rate of cure followed the exchange of both components (9/10, 90%). In the 21 patients in whom one or both components were retained, four had a relapse of the same infecting organism and three had an infection with another organism. Hence the rate of cure was 66.7% (14 of 21). In these 21 patients, we compared the treatment given to an algorithm developed for the treatment of PJI of the knee and hip. In 17 (80.9%) patients, treatment was not according to the algorithm. Most (11 of 17) had only one criterion against retention of one or both components. In all, ten of 11 patients with severe soft-tissue compromise as a single criterion had a relapse-free survival. We propose that the treatment concept for PJI of the ankle requires adaptation of the grading of quality of the soft tissues.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:772–7.

The October 2015 Knee Roundup360 looks at: Allergy and outcome in arthroplasty; Physiotherapy and drains not such a bad combination?; Another nail in the coffin for arthroscopists?; Graft precondition hocus pocus; Extended dose steroids in knee arthritis?; Indolent peri-prosthetic infection; Computer modelling and medial knee arthritis

Peri-prosthetic infection remains a leading cause of revision surgery. Recent publications from the American Musculoskeletal Infection Society have sought to establish a definition of peri-prosthetic infection based on clinical findings and laboratory investigations. The limitations of their approach are discussed and an alternative definition is proposed, which it is felt may better reflect the uncertainties encountered in clinical practice.

Femoral revision after cemented total hip replacement (THR) might include technical difficulties, following essential cement removal, which might lead to further loss of bone and consequently inadequate fixation of the subsequent revision stem.

Femoral impaction allografting has been widely used in revision surgery for the acetabulum, and subsequently for the femur. In combination with a primary cemented stem, impaction grafting allows for femoral bone restoration through incorporation and remodelling of the impacted morsellized bone graft by the host skeleton. Cavitary bone defects affecting meta-physis and diaphysis leading to a wide femoral shaft, are ideal indications for this technique. Cancellous allograft bone chips of 1 mm to 2 mm size are used, and tapered into the canal with rods of increasing diameters. To impact the bone chips into the femoral canal a prosthesis dummy of the same dimensions of the definitive cemented stem is driven into the femur to ensure that the chips are very firmly impacted. Finally, a standard stem is cemented into the neo-medullary canal using bone cement.

To date several studies have shown favourable results with this technique, with some excellent long-term results reported in independent clinical centres worldwide.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:92–4.

Based on the first implementation of mixing antibiotics into bone cement in the 1970s, the Endo-Klinik has used one stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in over 85% of cases. Looking carefully at current literature and guidelines for PJI treatment, there is no clear evidence that a two stage procedure has a higher success rate than a one-stage approach. A cemented one-stage exchange potentially offers certain advantages, mainly based on the need for only one operative procedure, reduced antibiotics and hospitalisation time. In order to fulfill a one-stage approach, there are obligatory pre-, peri- and post-operative details that need to be meticulously respected, and are described in detail. Essential pre-operative diagnostic testing is based on the joint aspiration with an exact identification of any bacteria. The presence of a positive bacterial culture and respective antibiogram are essential, to specify the antibiotics to be loaded to the bone cement, which allows a high local antibiotic elution directly at the surgical side. A specific antibiotic treatment plan is generated by a microbiologist. The surgical success relies on the complete removal of all pre-existing hardware, including cement and restrictors and an aggressive and complete debridement of any infected soft tissues and bone material. Post-operative systemic antibiotic administration is usually completed after only ten to 14 days.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:77–83.