Aims. We describe the use of a protocol of irrigation and debridement (I& D) with retention of the implant for the treatment of periprosthetic infection of a total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). This may be an attractive alternative to staged re-implantation. . Patients and Methods. Between 1990 and 2010, 23 consecutive patients were treated in this way. Three were lost to follow-up leaving 20 patients (21 TEAs) in the study. There were six men and 14 women. Their mean age was 58 years (23 to 76). The protocol involved: component unlinking, irrigation and debridement (I& D), and the introduction of antibiotic laden cement beads; organism-specific intravenous antibiotics; repeat I& D and re-linkage of the implant if appropriate; long-term oral antibiotic therapy. . Results. The mean follow-up was 7.1 years (2 to 16). The infecting micro-organisms were Staphylococcus aureus in nine, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus in 13, Corynebacterium in three and other in six cases. Re-operations included three repeat staged I& Ds, two repeat superficial I& Ds and one fasciocutaneous forearm flap. One patient required removal of the implant due to persistent infection. All except three patients rated their pain as absent or mild. Outcome was rated as good or excellent in 15 patients (mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score 78 points, (5 to 100) with a mean flexion-extension arc of 103° (40° to 150°)). . Conclusion. A staged protocol can be successful in retaining stable components of an infected TEA. Function of the elbow may compare unfavourably to that after an uncomplicated TEA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:976–83

Periprosthetic joint infection represents a devastating complication after total elbow arthroplasty. Several measures can be implemented before, during, and after surgery to decrease infection rates, which exceed 5%. Debridement with antibiotics and implant retention has been reported to be successful in less than one-third of acute infections, but still plays a role. For elbows with well-fixed implants, staged retention seems to be equally successful as the more commonly performed two-stage reimplantation, both with a success rate of 70% to 80%. Permanent resection or even amputation are occasionally considered. Not uncommonly, a second-stage reimplantation requires complex reconstruction of the skeleton with allografts, and the extensor mechanism may also be deficient. Further developments are needed to improve our management of infection after elbow arthroplasty.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(11):1321–1326.

Aims

In patients with a failed radial head arthroplasty (RHA), simple removal of the implant is an option. However, there is little information in the literature about the outcome of this procedure. The aim of this study was to review the mid-term clinical and radiological results, and the rate of complications and removal of the implant, in patients whose initial RHA was undertaken acutely for trauma involving the elbow.

We report our experience of staged revision surgery for the treatment of infected total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Between 1998 and 2010 a consecutive series of 33 patients (34 TEAs) underwent a first-stage procedure with the intention to proceed to second-stage procedure when the infection had been controlled. A single first-stage procedure with removal of the components and cement was undertaken for 29 TEAs (85%), followed by the insertion of antibiotic-impregnated cement beads, and five (15%) required two or more first-stage procedures. The most common organism isolated was coagulase-negative Staphylococcus in 21 TEAs (62%).

A second-stage procedure was performed for 26 TEAs (76%); seven patients (seven TEAs, 21%) had a functional resection arthroplasty with antibiotic beads in situ and had no further surgery, one had a persistent discharge preventing further surgery.

There were three recurrent infections (11.5%) in those patients who underwent a second-stage procedure. The infection presented at a mean of eight months (5 to 10) post-operatively. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) in those who underwent a second stage revision without recurrent infection was 81.1 (65 to 95).

Staged revision surgery is successful in the treatment of patients with an infected TEA and is associated with a low rate of recurrent infection. However, when infection does occur, this study would suggest that it becomes apparent within ten months of the second stage procedure.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1681–6.