Prophylactic antibiotics are important in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty. Their effectiveness depends on the choice of antibiotic and the optimum timing of their administration, to ensure adequate tissue concentrations. Cephalosporins are typically used, but an increasing number of resistant organisms are causing PJI, leading to the additional use of vancomycin. There are difficulties, however, with the systemic administration of vancomycin including its optimal timing, due to the need for prolonged administration, and potential adverse reactions. Intraosseous regional administration distal to a tourniquet is an alternative and attractive mode of delivery due to the ease of obtaining intraosseous access. Many authors have reported the effectiveness of intraosseous prophylaxis in achieving higher concentrations of antibiotic in the tissues compared with intravenous administration, providing equal or enhanced prophylaxis while minimizing adverse effects. This annotation describes the technique of intraosseous administration of antibiotics and summarizes the relevant clinical literature to date. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(11):1135–1139

Aims. Antibiotic prophylaxis involving timely administration of appropriately dosed antibiotic is considered effective to reduce the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) after total hip and total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). Cephalosporins provide effective prophylaxis, although evidence regarding the optimal timing and dosage of prophylactic antibiotics is inconclusive. The aim of this study is to examine the association between cephalosporin prophylaxis dose, timing, and duration, and the risk of SSI after THA/TKA. Methods. A prospective multicentre cohort study was undertaken in consenting adults with osteoarthritis undergoing elective primary TKA/THA at one of 19 high-volume Australian public/private hospitals. Data were collected prior to and for one-year post surgery. Logistic regression was undertaken to explore associations between dose, timing, and duration of cephalosporin prophylaxis and SSI. Data were analyzed for 1,838 participants. There were 264 SSI comprising 63 deep SSI (defined as requiring intravenous antibiotics, readmission, or reoperation) and 161 superficial SSI (defined as requiring oral antibiotics) experienced by 249 (13.6%) participants within 365 days of surgery. Results. In adjusted modelling, factors associated with a significant reduction in any SSI and deep SSI included: correct weight-adjusted dose (any SSI; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.68 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.99); p = 0.045); commencing preoperative cephalosporin within 60 minutes (any SSI, aOR 0.56 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.89); p = 0.012; deep SSI, aOR 0.29 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.59); p < 0.001) or 60 minutes or longer prior to skin incision (aOR 0.35 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.70); p = 0.004; deep SSI, AOR 0.27 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.83); p = 0.022), compared to at or after skin incision. Other factors significantly associated with an increased risk of any SSI, but not deep SSI alone, were receiving a non-cephalosporin antibiotic preoperatively (aOR 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.81); p = 0.044) and changing cephalosporin dose (aOR 1.76 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.57); p = 0.002). There was no difference in risk of any or deep SSI between the duration of prophylaxis less than or in excess of 24 hours. Conclusion. Ensuring adequate, weight-adjusted dosing and early, preoperative delivery of prophylactic antibiotics may reduce the risk of SSI in THA/TKA, whereas the duration of prophylaxis beyond 24 hours is unnecessary. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):252–260

Aims. Despite recent literature questioning their use, vancomycin and clindamycin often substitute cefazolin as the preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), especially in the setting of documented allergy to penicillin. Topical povidone-iodine lavage and vancomycin powder (VIP) are adjuncts that may further broaden antimicrobial coverage, and have shown some promise in recent investigations. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to compare the risk of acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in primary TKA patients who received cefazolin and VIP to those who received a non-cephalosporin alternative and VIP. Methods. This was a retrospective cohort study of 11,550 primary TKAs performed at an orthopaedic hospital between 2013 and 2019. The primary outcome was PJI occurring within 90 days of surgery. Patients were stratified into two groups (cefazolin vs non-cephalosporin) based on their preoperative antibiotic. All patients also received the VIP protocol at wound closure. Bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to control for potential confounders and identify the odds ratio of PJI. Results. In all, 10,484 knees (90.8%) received cefazolin, while 1,066 knees (9.2%) received a non-cephalosporin agent (either vancomycin or clindamycin) as preoperative prophylaxis. The rate of PJI in the cefazolin group (0.5%; 48/10,484) was significantly lower than the rate of PJI in the non-cephalosporin group (1.0%; 11/1,066) (p = 0.012). After controlling for confounding variables, the odds ratio (OR) of developing a PJI was increased in the non-cephalosporin cohort compared to the cefazolin cohort (OR 2.389; 1.2 to 4.6); p = 0.01). Conclusion. Despite the use of topical irrigant solutions and addition of local antimicrobial agents, the use of a non-cephalosporin perioperative antibiotic continues to be associated with a greater risk of TKA PJI compared to cefazolin. Strategies that increase the proportion of patients receiving cefazolin rather than non-cephalosporin alternatives must be emphasized. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(1):35–41

The December 2022 Spine Roundup. 360. looks at: Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis protocol on a Level 1 trauma centre patient database; Non-specific spondylodiscitis: a new perspective for surgical treatment; Disc degeneration could be recovered after chemonucleolysis; Three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus corpectomy- anterior cervical discectomy and fusion “hybrid” procedures: how does the alignment look?; Rivaroxaban or enoxaparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis; Surgical site infection: when do we have to remove the implants?; Determination of a neurologic safe zone for bicortical S1 pedicle placement; Do you need to operate on unstable spine fractures in the elderly: outcomes and mortality; Degeneration to deformity: when does the patient need both?

Aims. Malignancy and surgery are risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). We undertook a systematic review of the literature concerning the prophylactic management of VTE in orthopaedic oncology patients. Methods. MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane, and CINAHL databases were searched focusing on VTE, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding, or wound complication rates. Results. In all, 17 studies published from 1998 to 2018 met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. The mean incidence of all VTE events in orthopaedic oncology patients was 10.7% (1.1% to 27.7%). The rate of PE was 2.4% (0.1% to 10.6%) while the rate of lethal PE was 0.6% (0.0% to 4.3%). The overall rate of DVT was 8.8% (1.1% to 22.3%) and the rate of symptomatic DVT was 2.9% (0.0% to 6.2%). From the studies that screened all patients prior to hospital discharge, the rate of asymptomatic DVT was 10.9% (2.0% to 20.2%). The most common risk factors identified for VTE were endoprosthetic replacements, hip and pelvic resections, presence of metastases, surgical procedures taking longer than three hours, and patients having chemotherapy. Mean incidence of VTE with and without chemical prophylaxis was 7.9% (1.1% to 21.8%) and 8.7% (2.0% to 23.4%; p = 0.11), respectively. No difference in the incidence of bleeding or wound complications between prophylaxis groups was reported. Conclusion. Current evidence is limited to guide clinicians. It is our consensus opinion, based upon logic and deduction, that all patients be considered for both mechanical and chemical VTE prophylaxis, particularly in high-risk patients (pelvic or hip resections, prosthetic reconstruction, malignant diagnosis, presence of metastases, or surgical procedures longer than three hours). Additionally, the surgeon must determine, in each patient, if the risk of haemorrhage outweighs the risk of VTE. No individual pharmacological agent has been identified as being superior in the prevention of VTE events. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12)1743:–1751

Aims. To explore the effect of different durations of antibiotics after stage II reimplantation on the prognosis of two-stage revision for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods. This study involved a retrospective collection of patients who underwent two-stage revision for chronic PJI and continued to use extended antibiotic prophylaxis in two regional medical centres from January 2010 to June 2018. The patients were divided into a short (≤ one month) or a long (> one month) course of treatment based on the duration of antibiotics following stage II reimplantation. The difference in the infection control rate between the two groups was compared, and prognostic factors for recurrence were analyzed. Results. A total of 105 patients with chronic PJI were enrolled: 64 patients in the short course group and 41 patients in the long course group. For 99 of the patients, the infection was under control during a follow-up period of at least 24 months after two-stage revision. For the short course group, the mean duration of antibiotic prophylaxis after stage II reimplantation was 20.17 days (SD 5.30) and the infection control rate was 95.3%; for the long course group these were 45.02 days (SD 15.03) and 92.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference in infection control rates between the two groups (p = 0.676). Cox regression analysis found that methicillin-resistant staphylococcus infection (p = 0.015) was an independent prognostic factor for recurrence. Conclusion. After stage II reimplantation surgery of two-stage revision for chronic PJI, extended antibiotic prophylaxis for less than one month can achieve good infection control rate. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):790–796

Aims. Wrist arthroscopy is a standard procedure in hand surgery for diagnosis and treatment of wrist injuries. Even though not generally recommended for similar procedures, general administration of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) is still widely used in wrist arthroscopy. Methods. A clinical ambispective dual-centre study was performed to determine whether PAP reduces postoperative infection rates after soft tissue-only wrist arthroscopies. Retrospective and prospective data was collected at two hospitals with departments specialized in hand surgery. During the study period, 464 wrist arthroscopies were performed, of these 178 soft-tissue-only interventions met the study criteria and were included. Signs of postoperative infection and possible adverse drug effects (ADEs) of PAP were monitored. Additionally, risk factors for surgical site infection (SSIs), such as diabetes mellitus and BMI, were obtained. Results. The overall infection rate of SSI was zero. Neither in the PAP group (n = 69) nor in the control group (n = 109) were signs of postoperative infection observed. Observed symptoms of ADEs were three-times higher in the PAP group when compared to the control-group (16.3 vs 5.5%; p = 0.043). No major ADEs were observed, but one in ten patients in the PAP group reported mild to severe intestinal or hypersensitivity symptoms. Conclusion. We demonstrate that the number needed to treat (NNT) with PAP to prevent one postoperative infection in soft-tissue arthroscopies of the wrist is > 109. Conversely, symptoms of ADEs were reported by one out of ten patients given PAP. Considering the high NNT to prevent postoperative infection and the large number of ADEs caused by PAP, we recommend not to use PAP routinely in soft-tissue arthroscopies of the wrist. Subsequent large-scale studies should be conducted to substantiate these results. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(4):219–225

Objectives. As well as debridement and irrigation, soft-tissue coverage, and osseous stabilization, systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is considered the benchmark in the management of open fractures and considerably reduces the risk of subsequent fracture-related infections (FRI). The direct application of antibiotics in the surgical field (local antibiotics) has been used for decades as additional prophylaxis in open fractures, although definitive evidence confirming a beneficial effect is scarce. The purpose of the present study was to review the clinical evidence regarding the effect of prophylactic application of local antibiotics in open limb fractures. Methods. A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Cohort studies investigating the effect of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis compared with systemic prophylaxis alone in the management of open fractures were included and the data were pooled in a meta-analysis. Results. In total, eight studies which included 2738 patients were eligible for quantitative synthesis. The effect of antibiotic-loaded poly(methyl methacrylate) beads was investigated by six of these studies, and two studies evaluated the effect of local antibiotics applied without a carrier. Meta-analysis showed a significantly lower infection rate when local antibiotics were applied (4.6%; 91/1986) than in the control group receiving standard systemic prophylaxis alone (16.5%; 124/752) (p < 0.001) (odds ratio 0.30; 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.40). Conclusion. This meta-analysis suggests a risk reduction in FRI of 11.9% if additional local antibiotics are given prophylactically for open limb fractures. However, due to limited quality, heterogeneity, and considerable risk of bias, the pooling of data from primary studies has to be interpreted with caution. Cite this article: M. Morgenstern, A. Vallejo, M. A. McNally, T. F. Moriarty, J. Y. Ferguson, S. Nijs, WJ. Metsemakers. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:447–456. The effect of local antibiotic prophylaxis when treating open limb fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.77.BJR-2018-0043.R1

Prophylactic antibiotics can decrease the risk of wound infection and have been routinely employed in orthopaedic surgery for decades. Despite their widespread use, questions still surround the selection of antibiotics for prophylaxis, timing and duration of administration. The health economic costs associated with wound infections are significant, and the judicious but appropriate use of antibiotics can reduce this risk. This review examines the evidence behind commonly debated topics in antibiotic prophylaxis and highlights the uses and advantages of some commonly used antibiotics. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1014–19

Aims. We studied the safety and efficacy of multimodal thromboprophylaxis in patients with a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) within the first 120 postoperative days, and the mortality during the first year. Multimodal prophylaxis includes discontinuation of procoagulant medications, VTE risk stratification, regional anaesthesia, an intravenous bolus of unfractionated heparin prior to femoral preparation, rapid mobilization, the use of pneumatic compression devices, and chemoprophylaxis tailored to the patient’s risk of VTE. Methods. Between 2004 to 2018, 257 patients with a proven history of VTE underwent 277 primary elective THA procedures by two surgeons at a single institution. The patients had a history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (186, 67%), pulmonary embolism (PE) (43, 15.5%), or both (48, 17.5%). Chemoprophylaxis included aspirin (38 patients), anticoagulation (215 patients), or a combination of aspirin and anticoagulation (24 patients). A total of 50 patients (18%) had a vena cava filter in situ at the time of surgery. Patients were followed for 120 days to record complications, and for one year to record mortality. Results. Postoperative VTE was diagnosed in seven patients (2.5%): DVT in five, and PE with and without DVT in one patient each. After hospitalization, three patients required readmiss-ion for evacuation of a haematoma, one for wound drainage, and one for monitoring of an elevated international normalized ratio (INR). Seven patients died (2.5%). One patient died five months postoperatively of a PE during open thrombectomy. She had discontinued anticoagulation. One patient died of a haemorrhagic stroke while receiving Coumadin. PE or bleeding was not suspected in the remaining five fatalities. Conclusion. Multimodal prophylaxis is safe and effective in patients with a history of VTE. Postoperative anticoagulation should be prudent as very few patients developed VTE (2.5%) or died of suspected or confirmed PE. Mortality during the first year was mostly unrelated to either VTE or bleeding. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):71–77

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

Heterotopic ossification following joint replacement in the lower limb occurs in 3% to 90% of cases. Higher grades of heterotopic ossification can result in significant limitation of function and can negate the benefits of joint replacement. The understanding of the pathophysiology of this condition has improved in recent years. It would appear to be related to a combination of systemic and local factors, including over-expression of bone morphogenetic protein-4. There is currently little evidence to support the routine use of prophylaxis for heterotopic ossification in arthroplasty patients, but prophylaxis is recommended by some for high-risk patients. Radiotherapy given as one dose of 7 Gy to 8 Gy, either pre-operatively (< four hours before) or post-operatively (within 72 hours of surgery), appears to be more effective than indometacin therapy (75 mg daily for six weeks). In cases of prophylaxis against recurrent heterotopic ossification following excision, recent work has suggested that a combination of radiotherapy and indometacin is effective. Advances in our understanding of this condition may permit the development of newer, safer treatment modalities

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains an immediate threat to patients following total hip and knee replacement. While there is a strong consensus that steps should be taken to minimise the risk to patients by utilising some forms of prophylaxis for the vast majority of patients, the methods utilised have been extremely variable. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been published by various professional organisations for over 25 years to provide recommendations to standardise VTE prophylaxis. Historically, these recommendations have varied widely depending in underlying assumptions, goals, and methodology of the various groups. This effort has previously been exemplified by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). The former group of medical specialists targeted minimising venographically proven deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (the vast majority of which are asymptomatic) as their primary goal prior to 2012. The latter group of surgeons targeted minimising symptomatic VTE. As a result prior to 2012, the recommendations of the two groups were widely divergent. In the past year, both groups have reassessed the current literature with the principal goals of minimising symptomatic VTE events and bleeding complications. As a result, for the first time the CPGs of these two major subspecialty organisations are in close agreement

Symptomatic and asymptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common complication of knee replacement, with an incidence of up to 85% in the absence of prophylaxis. National guidelines for thromboprophylaxis in knee replacement are derived from total knee replacement (TKR) data. No guidelines exist specific to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). We investigated whether the type of knee arthroplasty (TKR or UKR) was related to the incidence of DVT and discuss the applicability of existing national guidelines for prophylaxis following UKR. . Data were collected prospectively on 3449 knee replacements, including procedure type, tourniquet time, surgeon, patient age, use of drains and gender. These variables were related to the incidence of symptomatic DVT. The overall DVT rate was 1.6%. The only variable that had an association with DVT was operation type, with TKR having a higher incidence than UKR (2.2% versus 0.3%, p < 0.001). These data show that the incidence of DVT after UKR is both clinically and statistically significantly lower than that after TKR. . TKR and UKR patients have different risk profiles for symptomatic DVT. The risk-benefit ratio for TKR that has been used to produce national guidelines may not be applicable to UKR. Further research is required to establish the most appropriate form of prophylaxis for UKR

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of non-selective and selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in preventing heterotopic ossification (HO) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. A thorough and systematic literature search was conducted and 29 studies were found that met inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and statistical analysis was carried out generating forest plots. Results. Non-selective NSAIDs showed a significant decrease in the odds for forming HO after THA (odds ratio (OR) -1.35, confidence interval (CI) -1.83 to -0.86) when compared with placebo. Selective NSAIDs also showed a significant decrease in the odds for forming HO after THA when compared with placebo (OR -1.58, CI -2.41 to -0.75). When comparing non-selective NSAIDs with selective NSAIDs, there was no significant change in the odds for forming HO after THA (OR 0.22, CI -0.36 to 0.79). Conclusion. Our meta-analyses of all available data suggest that both non-selective and selective NSAIDs are effective HO prophylaxis and can be used routinely after THA for pain control as well as prevention of HO. Indomethacin may serve as the benchmark among non-selective NSAIDs and celecoxib among selective NSAIDs. There was no difference in the incidence of HO between non-selective and selective NSAIDs, allowing physicians to choose either based on the clinical scenario and patient-specific factors. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:915–22

Aims. The purpose of this article was to review the current literature pertaining to the use of mobile compression devices (MCDs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and to discuss the results of data from our institution. Patients and Methods. Previous studies have illustrated higher rates of post-operative wound complications, re-operation and re-admission with the use of more aggressive anticoagulation regimens, such as warfarin and factor Xa inhibitors. This highlights the importance of the safety, as well as efficacy, of the chemoprophylactic regimen. Results. Studies have shown a symptomatic VTE rate of 0.92% with use of MCDs for prophylaxis, which is comparable with rates seen with more aggressive anticoagulation protocols. A prior prospective study found that use of a pre-operative risk stratification protocol based on personal history of deep vein thrombosis, family history of VTE, active cancer, or a hypercoaguable state allowed for the avoidance of aggressive prophylactic anticoagulation in over 70% of patients while maintaining a low incidence of symptomatic VTE. Conclusion. Further investigation is needed into the role of aspirin in VTE prophylaxis as well as the efficacy of MCDs as stand-alone prophylactic treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(1 Supple A):8–13

Recent recommendations by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) suggest that all patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery should be assessed for the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Little is known about the incidence of symptomatic VTE after elective external fixation. We studied a consecutive series of adult patients who had undergone elective Ilizarov surgery without routine pharmacological prophylaxis to establish the incidence of symptomatic VTE. . A review of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive patients who were treated between October 1998 and February 2011 identified 457 frames in 442 adults whose mean age was 42.6 years (16.0 to 84.6). There were 425 lower limb and 32 upper limb frames. The mean duration of treatment was 25.7 weeks (1.6 to 85.3). According to NICE guidelines all the patients had at least one risk factor for VTE, 246 had two, 172 had three and 31 had four or more. . One patient (0.23%) developed a pulmonary embolus after surgery and was later found to have an inherited thrombophilia. There were 27 deaths, all unrelated to VTE. The cost of providing VTE prophylaxis according to NICE guidelines in this group of patients would be £89 493.40 (£195.80 per patient) even if the cheapest recommended medication was used. . The rate of symptomatic VTE after Ilizarov surgery was low despite using no pharmacological prophylaxis. This study leads us to question whether NICE guidelines are applicable to these patients. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:426–30

A randomised prospective trial was undertaken of antibiotic prophylaxis given at various intervals before inflation of the tourniquet for arthroplasty of the knee. Cefuroxime assays of bone and subcutaneous fat from samples collected throughout the operation demonstrated that an interval of 10 minutes was necessary to obtain adequate prophylaxis. Improvement in the timing of antibiotic prophylaxis may result in a reduction in the incidence of infection

More than a million hip replacements are carried out each year worldwide, and the number of other artificial joints inserted is also rising, so that infections associated with arthroplasties have become more common. However, there is a paucity of literature on infections due to haematogenous seeding following dental procedures. We reviewed the published literature to establish the current knowledge on this problem and to determine the evidence for routine antibiotic prophylaxis prior to a dental procedure. We found that antimicrobial prophylaxis before dental interventions in patients with artificial joints lacks evidence-based information and thus cannot be universally recommended