We have investigated whether the use of laminar-flow theatres and space suits reduced the rate of revision for early deep infection after total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement by reviewing the results of the New Zealand Joint Registry at ten years. Of the 51 485 primary THRs and 36 826 primary TKRs analysed, laminar-flow theatres were used in 35.5% and space suits in 23.5%. For THR there was a significant increase in early infection in those procedures performed with the use of a space suit compared with those without (p < 0.0001), in those carried out in a laminar-flow theatre compared with a conventional theatre (p < 0.003) and in those undertaken in a laminar-flow theatre with a space suit (p < 0.001) when compared with conventional theatres without such a suit. The results were similar for TKR with the use of a space suit (p < 0.001), in laminar-flow theatres (p < 0.019) and when space suits were used in those theatres (p < 0.001). These findings were independent of age, disease and operating time and were unchanged when the surgeons and hospital were analysed individually. The rate of revision for early deep infection has not been reduced by using laminar flow and space suits. Our results question the rationale for their increasing use in routine joint replacement, where the added cost to the health system seems to be unjustified

Aims. The interaction between surgical lighting and laminar airflow is poorly understood. We undertook an experiment to identify any effect contemporary surgical lights have on laminar flow and recommend practical strategies to limit any negative effects. Materials and Methods. Neutrally buoyant bubbles were introduced into the surgical field of a simulated setup for a routine total knee arthroplasty in a laminar flow theatre. Patterns of airflow were observed and the number of bubbles remaining above the surgical field over time identified. Five different lighting configurations were assessed. Data were analysed using simple linear regression after logarithmic transformation. Results. In the absence of surgical lights, laminar airflow was observed, bubbles were cleared rapidly and did not accumulate. If lights were placed above the surgical field laminar airflow was abolished and bubbles rose from the surgical field to the lights then circulated back to the surgical field. The value of the decay parameter (slope) of the two setups differed significantly; no light (b = -1.589) versus one light (b = -0.1273, p < 0.001). Two lights touching (b = -0.1191) above the surgical field had a similar effect to that of a single light (p = 0. 2719). Two lights positioned by arms outstretched had a similar effect (b = -0.1204) to two lights touching (p = 0.998) and one light (p = 0.444). When lights were separated widely (160 cm), laminar airflow was observed but the rate of clearance of the bubbles remained slower (b = -1.1165) than with no lights present (p = 0.004). . Conclusion. Surgical lights have a significantly negative effect on laminar airflow. Lights should be positioned as far away as practicable from the surgical field to limit this effect. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1061–6

Aims

Fungal periprosthetic joint infections (fPJIs) are rare complications, constituting only 1% of all PJIs. Neither a uniform definition for fPJI has been established, nor a standardized treatment regimen. Compared to bacterial PJI, there is little evidence for fPJI in the literature with divergent results. Hence, we implemented a novel treatment algorithm based on three-stage revision arthroplasty, with local and systemic antifungal therapy to optimize treatment for fPJI.

Aims

The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant challenges to healthcare systems across the globe in 2020. There were concerns surrounding early reports of increased mortality among patients undergoing emergency or non-urgent surgery. We report the morbidity and mortality in patients who underwent arthroplasty procedures during the UK first stage of the pandemic.

Aims

Infection following total hip or knee arthroplasty is a serious complication. We noted an increase in post-operative infection in cases carried out in temporary operating theatres. We therefore compared those cases performed in standard and temporary operating theatres and examined the deep periprosthetic infection rates.

Patients with infected arthroplasties are normally treated with a two-stage exchange procedure using polymethylmethacrylate bone cement spacers impregnated with antibiotics. However, spacers may act as a foreign body to which micro-organisms may adhere and grow. In this study it was hypothesised that subclinical infection may be diagnosed with sonication of the surface biofilm of the spacer. The aims were to assess the presence of subclinical infection through sonication of the spacer at the time of a second-stage procedure, and to determine the relationship between subclinical infection and the clinical outcome. Of 55 patients studied, 11 (20%) were diagnosed with subclinical infection. At a mean follow-up of 12 months (interquartile range 6 to 18), clinical failure was found in 18 (32.7%) patients. Of the patients previously diagnosed with subclinical infection, 63% (7 of 11) had failed compared with 25% (11 of 44) of those without subclinical infection (odds ratio 5.25, 95% confidence interval 1.29 to 21.4, p = 0.021). Sonication of the biofilm of the surface of the spacer is useful in order to exclude subclinical infection and therefore contributes to improving the outcome after two-stage procedures.

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.

We have investigated the contaminating bacteria in primary hip arthroplasty and their sensitivity to the prophylactic antibiotics currently in use. Impressions (627) of the gloved hands of the surgical team in 50 total hip arthroplasties were obtained on blood agar. The gloves were changed after draping, at intervals of 20 minutes thereafter, and before using cement. Changes were also undertaken whenever a visible puncture was detected. The culture plates were incubated at 37°C for 48 hours. Isolates were identified and tested for sensitivity to flucloxacillin, which is a recognised indicator of sensitivity to cefuroxime. They were also tested against other agents depending upon their appearance on Gram staining.

We found contamination in 57 (9%) impressions and 106 bacterial isolates. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were seen most frequently (68.9%), but we also isolated Micrococcus (12.3%), diphtheroids (9.4%), Staphylococcus aureus (6.6%) and Escherichia coli (0.9%). Of the coagulase-negative staphylococci, only 52.1% were sensitive to flucloxacillin and therefore to cefuroxime. We believe that it is now appropriate to review the relevance of prophylaxis with cefuroxime and to consider the use of other agents.