Tissue responses to debris formed by abrasion of polymethylmethacrylate
(PMMA) spacers at two-stage revision arthroplasty for prosthetic
joint infection are not well described. We hypothesised that PMMA
debris induces immunomodulation in periprosthetic tissues. Samples of tissue were taken during 35 two-stage revision arthroplasties
(nine total hip and 26 total knee arthroplasties) in patients whose
mean age was 67 years (44 to 85). Fourier transform infrared microscopy
was used to confirm the presence of PMMA particles. Histomorphometry
was performed using Sudan Red and Haematoxylin-Eosin staining.
CD-68, CD-20, CD-11(c), CD-3 and IL-17 antibodies were used to immunophenotype
the inflammatory cells. All slides were scored semi-quantitatively
using the modified Willert scoring system.Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of our study was to describe the characteristics,
treatment, and outcomes of patients with periprosthetic joint infection
(PJI) and normal inflammatory markers after total knee arthroplasty
(TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). In total 538 TKAs and 414 THAs underwent surgical treatment for
PJI and met the inclusion criteria. Pre-operative erythrocyte sedimentation
rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein level (CRP) were reviewed to identify
the seronegative cohort. An age- and gender-matched cohort was identified
from the remaining patients for comparison. Overall, 4% of confirmed
infections were seronegative (21 TKA and 17 THA). Of those who underwent
pre-operative aspiration, cultures were positive in 76% of TKAs
(n = 13) and 64% of THAs (n = 7). Cell count and differential were
suggestive of infection in 85% of TKA (n = 11) and all THA aspirates
(n = 5). The most common organism was coagulase-negative Cite this article:
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of
the most feared and challenging complications following total knee arthroplasty.
We provide a detailed description of our current understanding regarding
the management of PJI of the knee, including diagnostic aids,
pre-operative planning, surgical treatment, and outcome. Cite this article:
To investigate the outcomes of treatment of streptococcal periprosthetic
joint infection (PJI) involving total knee and hip arthroplasties. Streptococcal PJI episodes which occurred between January 2009
and December 2015 were identified from clinical databases. Presentation
and clinical outcomes for 30 streptococcal PJIs in 30 patients (12
hip and 18 knee arthroplasties) following treatment were evaluated
from the medical notes and at review. The Kaplan-Meier survival method
was used to estimate the probability of infection-free survival.
The influence of the biofilm active antibiotic rifampin was also
assessed.Aims
Patients and Methods
To analyse the effectiveness of debridement and implant retention
(DAIR) in patients with hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI)
and the relationship to patient characteristics. The outcome was
evaluated in hips with confirmed PJI and a follow-up of not less
than two years. Patients in whom DAIR was performed were identified from our
hip arthroplasty register (between 2004 and 2013). Adherence to
criteria for DAIR was assessed according to a previously published
algorithm.Aims
Patients and Methods
There have been only a few small studies of patients
with an infected shoulder replacement treated with a single-stage
exchange procedure. We retrospectively reviewed 35 patients (19 men
and 16 women) with a peri-prosthetic infection of the shoulder who
were treated in this way. A total of 26 were available for clinical
examination; three had died, two were lost to follow-up and four
patients had undergone revision surgery. The mean follow-up time was
4.7 years (1.1 to 13.25), with an infection-free survival of 94%. The organisms most commonly isolated intra-operatively were Single-stage exchange is a successful and practical treatment
for patients with peri-prosthetic infection of the shoulder. Cite this article:
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) complicates
between 0.5% and 1.2% primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and
may have devastating consequences. The traditional assessment of
patients suffering from PJI has involved the serological study of
inflammatory markers and microbiological analysis of samples obtained
from the joint space. Treatment has involved debridement and revision
arthroplasty performed in either one or two stages. We present an update on the burden of PJI, strategies for its
diagnosis and treatment, the challenge of resistant organisms and
the need for definitive evidence to guide the treatment of PJI after
THA. Cite this article:
The number of arthroplasties being undertaken
is expected to grow year on year, and periprosthetic joint infections will
be an increasing socioeconomic burden. The challenge to prevent
and eradicate these infections has resulted in the emergence of
several new strategies, which are discussed in this review. Cite this article:
We report the outcome at ten to 15 years of two-stage revision for hip infection in 99 patients using the Prostalac articulated hip spacer system. All the patients were contacted to determine their current functional and infection status using the Oxford-12, Short form-12, and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index questionnaires. A total of 11 of the 99 patients had a further infection, of whom seven responded to repeat surgery with no further sequelae. The mean interval between the stages was five months (1 to 36). We were able to review 48 living patients, with a mean age of 72 years (46 to 86), 34 (71%) of whom provided health-related quality-of-life outcome scores. The mean follow-up was 12 years (10 to 15). The long-term success rate was 89% and with additional surgery this rose to 96%. The mean global Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index score was 80.6 ( Two-stage revision for hip infection using a Prostalac interim spacer offers a predictable and lasting solution for patients with this difficult problem.
Advocates of debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR)
in hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) argue that a procedure
not disturbing a sound prosthesis-bone interface is likely to lead
to better survival and functional outcome compared with revision.
This case-control study aims were to compare outcome of DAIRs for
infected primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with outcomes following
primary THA and two-stage revision of infected primary THAs. We retrospectively reviewed all DAIRs, performed for confirmed
infected primary hip arthropasty (n = 82) at out institution, between
1997 and 2013. Data recorded included full patient information and
type of surgery. Outcome measures included complications, mortality,
implant survivorship and functional outcome. Outcome was compared with
two control groups matched for gender and age; a cohort of primary
THAs (n = 120) and a cohort of two-stage revisions for infection
(n = 66).Aims
Patients and Methods
Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is challenging
when there is severe loss of bone in the proximal femur. The purpose
of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes
of revision THA in patients with severe proximal femoral bone loss
treated with a fluted, tapered, modular femoral component. Between
January 1998 and December 2004, 92 revision THAs were performed
in 92 patients using a single fluted, tapered, modular femoral stem
design. Pre-operative diagnoses included aseptic loosening, infection
and peri-prosthetic fracture. Bone loss was categorised pre-operatively
as Paprosky types III-IV, or Vancouver B3 in patients with a peri-prosthetic
fracture. The mean clinical follow-up was 6.4 years (2 to 12). A
total of 47 patients had peri-operative complications, 27 of whom
required further surgery. However, most of these further operations
involved retention of a well-fixed femoral stem, and 88/92 femoral
components (97%) remained Revision THA in patients with extensive proximal femoral bone
loss using the Link MP fluted, tapered, modular stem led to a high
rate of osseointegration of the stem at mid-term follow-up. Cite this article:
Advances in the treatment of periprosthetic joint
infections of the hip have once more pushed prosthesis preserving techniques
into the limelight. At the same time, the common infecting organisms
are evolving to become more resistant to conventional antimicrobial
agents. Whilst the epidemiology of resistant staphylococci is changing,
a number of recent reports have advocated the use of irrigation
and debridement and one-stage revision for the treatment of periprosthetic
joint infections due to resistant organisms. This review presents
the available evidence for the treatment of periprosthetic joint
infections of the hip, concentrating in particular on methicillin
resistant staphylococci. Cite this article:
Instability in flexion after total knee replacement
(TKR) typically occurs as a result of mismatched flexion and extension
gaps. The goals of this study were to identify factors leading to
instability in flexion, the degree of correction, determined radiologically,
required at revision surgery, and the subsequent clinical outcomes.
Between 2000 and 2010, 60 TKRs in 60 patients underwent revision
for instability in flexion associated with well-fixed components.
There were 33 women (55%) and 27 men (45%); their mean age was 65
years (43 to 82). Radiological measurements and the Knee Society
score (KSS) were used to assess outcome after revision surgery.
The mean follow-up was 3.6 years (2 to 9.8). Decreased condylar
offset (p <
0.001), distalisation of the joint line (p <
0.001)
and increased posterior tibial slope (p <
0.001) contributed
to instability in flexion and required correction at revision to regain
stability. The combined mean correction of posterior condylar offset
and joint line resection was 9.5 mm, and a mean of 5° of posterior
tibial slope was removed. At the most recent follow-up, there was
a significant improvement in the mean KSS for the knee and function
(both p <
0.001), no patient reported instability and no patient
underwent further surgery for instability. The following step-wise approach is recommended: reduction of
tibial slope, correction of malalignment, and improvement of condylar
offset. Additional joint line elevation is needed if the above steps
do not equalise the flexion and extension gaps. Cite this article: