This prospective five-year study analyses the impact of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) on an Irish orthopaedic unit. We identified 318 cases of MRSA, representing 0.76% of all admissions (41 971). A total of 240 (76%) cases were colonised with MRSA, while 120 (37.7%) were infected. Patients were admitted from home (218; 68.6%), nursing homes (72; 22.6%) and other hospitals (28; 8.8%). A total of 115 cases (36.6%) were colonised or infected on admission. Many patients were both colonised and infected at some stage. The length of hospital stay was almost trebled because of the presence of MRSA infection.

Encouragingly, overall infection rates have not risen significantly over the five years of the study despite increased prevalence of MRSA. However, the financial burden of MRSA is increasing, highlighting the need for progress in understanding how to control this resistant pathogen more effectively.

Antibiotic prophylaxis is routinely administered during joint replacement surgery and may predispose patients to Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD). The primary aim of this study was to determine the incidence of this following joint replacement, using a cefuroxime-based regimen. Patients developing CDAD were compared with a control group of patients without CDAD. The incidence of the former was 1.7 per 1000 primary joint replacements. Those patients prescribed additional antibiotics had a higher incidence of CDAD (p = 0.047), but there was no difference between the two groups in relation to the use of gastroprotective agents (p = 0.703). A trial of a new prophylaxis regimen would require 43 198 patients in each arm to show a reduction of one case per 1000 procedures. Cefuroxime-based antibiotic prophylaxis is safe in patients undergoing primary elective joint replacement.

Infection remains a significant and common complication after joint replacement and there is debate about which contributing factors are important. Few studies have investigated the effect of the operating time on infection.

We collected data prospectively from 5277 hip and knee replacements which included the type of procedure, the operating time, the use of drains, the operating theatre, surgeon, age and gender. In a subgroup of 3449 knee replacements further analysis was carried out using the tourniquet time in place of the operating time. These variables were assessed by the use of generalised linear modelling against superficial, deep or joint-space post-operative infection as defined by the Australian Surgical-Site Infection criteria.

The overall infection rate was 0.98%. In the replacement data set both male gender (z = 3.097, p = 0.00195) and prolonged operating time (z = 4.325, p < 0.001) were predictive of infection. In the knee subgroup male gender (z = 2.250, p = 0.02447), a longer tourniquet time (z = 2.867, p = 0.00414) and total knee replacement (versus unicompartmental knee replacement) (z = −2.052, p = 0.0420) were predictive of infection.

These findings support the view that a prolonged operating time and male gender are associated with an increased incidence of infection. Steps to minimise intra-operative delay should be instigated, and care should be exercised when introducing measures which prolong the duration of joint replacement.

The Department of Health and the Public Health Laboratory Service established the Nosocomial Infection National Surveillance Scheme in order to standardise the collection of information about infections acquired in hospital in the United Kingdom and provide national data with which hospitals could measure their own performance. The definition of superficial incisional infection (skin and subcutaneous tissue), set by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), should meet at least one of the defined criteria which would confirm the diagnosis and determine the need for specific treatment.

We have assessed the interobserver reliability of the criteria for superficial incisional infection set by the CDC in our current practice. The incisional site of 50 patients who had an elective primary arthroplasty of the hip or knee was evaluated independently by two orthopaedic clinical research fellows and two orthopaedic ward sisters for the presence or absence of surgical-site infection. Interobserver reliability was assessed by comparison of the criteria for wound infection used by the four observers using kappa reliability coefficients. Our study demonstrated that some of the components of the current CDC criteria were unreliable and we recommend their revision.

We have evaluated the extent to which diabetes affects the revision rate following total hip replacement (THR). Through the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry we identified all patients undergoing a primary THR (n = 57 575) between 1 January 1996 and 31 December 2005, of whom 3278 had diabetes. The presence of diabetes among these patients was identified through the Danish National Registry of Patients and the Danish National Drug Prescription Database. We estimated the relative risk for revision and the 95% confidence intervals for patients with diabetes compared to those without, adjusting for the confounding factors. Diabetes is associated with an increased risk of revision due to deep infection (relative risk = 1.45 (95% confidence interval 1.00 to 2.09), particularly in those with type 2 diabetes (relative risk = 1.49 (95% confidence interval 1.02 to 2.18)), those with diabetes for less than five years prior to THR (relative risk = 1.69 (95% confidence interval 1.24 to 2.32)), those with complications due to diabetes (relative risk = 2.11 (95% confidence interval 1.41 to 3.17)), and those with cardiovascular comorbidities prior to surgery (relative risk = 2.35 (95% confidence interval 1.39 to 3.98)).

Patients and surgeons should be aware of the relatively elevated risk of revision due to deep infection following THR in diabetes particularly in those with insufficient control of their glucose level.

Due to economic constraints, it has been suggested that joint replacement patients can be followed up in primary care. There are clinical, ethical and academic reasons why we must ensure that our joint replacements are appropriately clinically and radiologically followed up to minimise complications. This Editorial discusses this.

We reviewed 231 patients who had undergone total knee replacement with an AGC (Biomet) implant over a period of 2.5 years. After applying exclusion criteria and with some loss to follow-up, there were 144 patients available for study. These were divided into two groups; those who had received intra-articular steroid in the 11 months before surgery and those who had not.

There were three deep infections, all of which occurred in patients who had received a steroid injection. The incidence of superficial infection was not significantly different in the two groups. Five patients had undergone investigation for suspected deep infection because of persistent swelling or pain and all of these had received an intra-articular injection pre-operatively. We conclude that the decision to administer intra-articular steroids to a patient who may be a candidate for total knee replacement should not be taken lightly because of a risk of post-operative deep infection.

The Control of Infection Committee at a specialist orthopaedic hospital prospectively collected data on all episodes of bacteriologically-proven deep infection arising after primary hip and knee replacements over a 15-year period from 1987 to 2001.

There were 10 735 patients who underwent primary hip or knee replacement. In 34 of 5947 hip replacements (0.57%) and 41 of 4788 knee replacements (0.86%) a deep infection developed. The most common infecting micro-organism was coagulase-negative staphylococcus, followed by Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci and streptococci. Of the infecting organisms, 72% were sensitive to routine prophylactic antimicrobial agents.

Of the infections, 29% (22) arose in the first three months following surgery, 35% between three months and one year (26), and 36% (27) after one year. Most cases were detected early and treated aggressively, with eradication of the infection in 96% (72). There was no significant change in the infection rate or type of infecting micro-organism over the course of this study.

These results set a benchmark, and importantly emphasise that only 64% of peri-prosthetic infections arise within one year of surgery. These results also illustrate the advantages of conducting joint replacement surgery in the isolation of a specialist hospital.