The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains
demanding due to limitations of all the available diagnostic tests.
The synovial fluid marker, α-defensin, is a promising adjunct for
the assessment of potential PJI. The purpose of this study was to
investigate the qualitative assessment of α-defensin, using Synovasure
to detect or exclude periprosthetic infection in total joint arthroplasty. We studied 50 patients (28 women, 22 men, mean age 65 years;
20 to 89) with a clinical indication for revision arthroplasty who
met the inclusion criteria of this prospective diagnostic study.
The presence of α-defensin was determined using the qualitative
Synovasure test and compared with standard diagnostic methods for
PJI. Based on modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS)
criteria, 13 cases were categorised as septic and 36 as aseptic revisions.
One test was inconclusive.Aims
Patients and Methods
The August 2015 Knee Roundup360 looks at: Two days as good as three in TKA; Bilateral TKA: minimising the risks; Tranexamic acid in knee arthroplasty: everyone should be using it, but how?; Initial follow-up for knee arthroplasty?; Navigation finds its niche?; Another take on navigation?; Multimodal care for early knee osteoarthritis; ACL graft fixation methods under the spotlight
The August 2015 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: The well-fixed acetabular revision; Predicting complications in revision arthroplasty; Is infection associated with fixation?; Front or back? An enduring question in hip surgery; Muscle-sparing approaches?; Gabapentin as a post-operative analgesic adjunct; An Indian take on AVN of the hip; Weight loss and arthroplasty
Bariatric surgery has been advocated as a means
of reducing body mass index (BMI) and the risks associated with total
knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, this has not been proved clinically.
In order to determine the impact of bariatric surgery on the outcome
of TKA, we identified a cohort of 91 TKAs that were performed in
patients who had undergone bariatric surgery (bariatric cohort).
These were matched with two separate cohorts of patients who had not
undergone bariatric surgery. One was matched 1:1 with those with
a higher pre-bariatric BMI (high BMI group), and the other was matched
1:2 based on those with a lower pre-TKA BMI (low BMI group). In the bariatric group, the mean BMI before bariatric surgery
was 51.1 kg/m2 (37 to 72), which improved to 37.3 kg/m2 (24
to 59) at the time of TKA. Patients in the bariatric group had a
higher risk of, and worse survival free of, re-operation (hazard
ratio (HR) 2.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 6.2; p = 0.02)
compared with the high BMI group. Furthermore, the bariatric group
had a higher risk of, and worse survival free of re-operation (HR
2.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.3; p = 0.2) and revision (HR 2.2; 95% CI 1.1
to 6.5; p = 0.04) compared with the low BMI group. While bariatric surgery reduced the BMI in our patients, more
analysis is needed before recommending bariatric surgery before
TKA in obese patients. Cite this article:
The February 2015 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Hip arthroplasty in Down syndrome; Bulk femoral autograft successful in acetabular reconstruction; Arthroplasty follow-up: is the internet the solution?; Total hip arthroplasty following acetabular fracture; Salvage arthroplasty following failed hip internal fixation; Bone banking sensible financially and clinically; Allogenic blood transfusion in arthroplasty.
Increasing demand for total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA)
and associated follow-up has placed huge demands on orthopaedic
services. Feasible follow-up mechanisms are therefore essential. We conducted an audit of clinical follow-up decision-making for
THA/TKA based on questionnaire/radiograph review compared with local
practice of Arthroplasty Care Practitioner (ACP)-led outpatient
follow-up. In all 599 patients attending an ACP-led THA/TKA follow-up
clinic had a pelvic/knee radiograph, completed a pain/function questionnaire
and were reviewed by an ACP. An experienced orthopaedic surgeon
reviewed the same radiographs and questionnaires, without patient
contact or knowledge of the ACP’s decision. Each pathway classified
patients into: urgent review, annual monitoring, routine follow-up
or discharge. Aims
Methods
We wanted to investigate regional variations in the organisms
reported to be causing peri-prosthetic infections and to report
on prophylaxis regimens currently in use across England. Analysis of data routinely collected by Public Health England’s
(PHE) national surgical site infection database on elective primary
hip and knee arthroplasty procedures between April 2010 and March
2013 to investigate regional variations in causative organisms.
A separate national survey of 145 hospital Trusts (groups of hospitals
under local management) in England routinely performing primary
hip and/or knee arthroplasty was carried out by standard email questionnaire.Objectives
Methods