The recently published Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens In Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial found no benefit in extending antibiotic prophylaxis from 24 hours to five days after endoprosthetic reconstruction for lower limb bone tumours. PARITY is the first randomized controlled trial in orthopaedic oncology and is a huge step forward in understanding antibiotic prophylaxis. However, significant gaps remain, including questions around antibiotic choice, particularly in the UK, where cephalosporins are avoided due to concerns of Clostridioides difficile infection. We present a review of the evidence for antibiotic choice, dosing, and timing, and a brief description of PARITY, its implication for practice, and the remaining gaps in our understanding. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):850–856

Aims. Prophylactic antibiotic regimens for elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasty vary widely across hospitals and trusts in the UK. This study aimed to identify antibiotic prophylaxis regimens currently in use for elective primary arthroplasty across the UK, establish variations in antibiotic prophylaxis regimens and their impact on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the first-year post-index procedure, and evaluate adherence to current international consensus guidance. Methods. The guidelines for the primary and alternative recommended prophylactic antibiotic regimens in clean orthopaedic surgery (primary arthroplasty) for 109 hospitals and trusts across the UK were sought by searching each trust and hospital’s website (intranet webpages), and by using the MicroGuide app. The mean cost of each antibiotic regimen was calculated using price data from the British National Formulary (BNF). Regimens were then compared to the 2018 Philadelphia Consensus Guidance, to evaluate adherence to international guidance. Results. The primary choice and dosing of the prophylactic antimicrobial regimens varied widely. The two most used regimens were combined teicoplanin and gentamicin, and cefuroxime followed by two or three doses of cefuroxime eight-hourly, recommended by 24 centres (22.02%) each. The alternative choice and dosing of the prophylactic antimicrobial regimen also varied widely across the 83 centres with data available. Prophylaxis regimens across some centres fail to cover the likeliest causes of surgical site infection (SSI). Five centres (4.59%) recommend co-amoxiclav, which confers no Staphylococcus coverage, while 33 centres (30.28%) recommend cefuroxime, which confers no Enterococcus coverage. Limited adherence to 2018 Philadelphia Consensus Guidance was observed, with 67 centres (61.50%) not including a cephalosporin in their guidance. Conclusion. This analysis of guidance on antimicrobial prophylaxis in primary arthroplasty across 109 hospitals and trusts in the UK has identified widespread variation in primary and alternative antimicrobial regimens currently recommended. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):742–749

Objectives. 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. Methods. 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. Results. Analysis of 189 858 elective primary hip and knee arthroplasty procedures and 1116 surgical site infections found statistically significant variations for some causative organism between regions. There was a 100% response rate to the prophylaxis questionnaire that showed substantial variation between individual trust guidelines. A number of regimens currently in use are inconsistent with the best available evidence. Conclusions. The approach towards antibiotic prophylaxis in elective arthroplasty nationwide reveals substantial variation without clear justification. Only seven causative organisms are responsible for 89% of infections affecting primary hip and knee arthroplasty, which cannot justify such widespread variation between prophylactic antibiotic policies. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2015;4:181–189

Objective

Clinical studies of patients with bone sarcomas have been challenged by insufficient numbers at individual centres to draw valid conclusions. Our objective was to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive multi-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine whether a five-day regimen of post-operative antibiotics, in comparison to a 24-hour regimen, decreases surgical site infections in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for lower extremity primary bone tumours.

Aims. Antibiotic prophylaxis involving timely administration of appropriately dosed antibiotic is considered effective to reduce the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) after total hip and total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). Cephalosporins provide effective prophylaxis, although evidence regarding the optimal timing and dosage of prophylactic antibiotics is inconclusive. The aim of this study is to examine the association between cephalosporin prophylaxis dose, timing, and duration, and the risk of SSI after THA/TKA. Methods. A prospective multicentre cohort study was undertaken in consenting adults with osteoarthritis undergoing elective primary TKA/THA at one of 19 high-volume Australian public/private hospitals. Data were collected prior to and for one-year post surgery. Logistic regression was undertaken to explore associations between dose, timing, and duration of cephalosporin prophylaxis and SSI. Data were analyzed for 1,838 participants. There were 264 SSI comprising 63 deep SSI (defined as requiring intravenous antibiotics, readmission, or reoperation) and 161 superficial SSI (defined as requiring oral antibiotics) experienced by 249 (13.6%) participants within 365 days of surgery. Results. In adjusted modelling, factors associated with a significant reduction in any SSI and deep SSI included: correct weight-adjusted dose (any SSI; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.68 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.99); p = 0.045); commencing preoperative cephalosporin within 60 minutes (any SSI, aOR 0.56 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.89); p = 0.012; deep SSI, aOR 0.29 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.59); p < 0.001) or 60 minutes or longer prior to skin incision (aOR 0.35 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.70); p = 0.004; deep SSI, AOR 0.27 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.83); p = 0.022), compared to at or after skin incision. Other factors significantly associated with an increased risk of any SSI, but not deep SSI alone, were receiving a non-cephalosporin antibiotic preoperatively (aOR 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.81); p = 0.044) and changing cephalosporin dose (aOR 1.76 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.57); p = 0.002). There was no difference in risk of any or deep SSI between the duration of prophylaxis less than or in excess of 24 hours. Conclusion. Ensuring adequate, weight-adjusted dosing and early, preoperative delivery of prophylactic antibiotics may reduce the risk of SSI in THA/TKA, whereas the duration of prophylaxis beyond 24 hours is unnecessary. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):252–260

Discitis after discography is due to bacterial penetration into the intervertebral disc by a contaminated needle and has an incidence of 1% to 4%. We have examined the prophylactic role of cephazolin administered at the time of discography. An experimental study in sheep using radiographic contrast containing Staphylococcus epidermidis showed that either adding the antibiotic to the intradiscal suspension or giving it intravenously 30 minutes before intradiscal inoculation of bacteria prevented any radiographic, macroscopic or histological signs of discitis; all the intervertebral disc cultures were negative. In a prospective clinical study of 127 consecutive patients having lumbar discography, the injected contrast contained cephazolin 1 mg per ml. None of the patients developed clinical or radiographic signs of discitis. We recommend the use of a suitable broad spectrum antibiotic in a single prophylactic dose whenever the intervertebral disc is entered.

Antibiotic levels in bone and fat were measured in patients undergoing knee replacement to determine the time that should elapse between intravenous injection and tourniquet inflation. The tissue levels increased progressively with time, and there was wide variation in absorption rate between patients and between the two cephalosporins assessed. Five minutes should probably be left between systemic injection and inflation of the tourniquet, though two minutes may be long enough for drugs which are rapidly absorbed.

Prophylactic antibiotics are important in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty. Their effectiveness depends on the choice of antibiotic and the optimum timing of their administration, to ensure adequate tissue concentrations. Cephalosporins are typically used, but an increasing number of resistant organisms are causing PJI, leading to the additional use of vancomycin. There are difficulties, however, with the systemic administration of vancomycin including its optimal timing, due to the need for prolonged administration, and potential adverse reactions. Intraosseous regional administration distal to a tourniquet is an alternative and attractive mode of delivery due to the ease of obtaining intraosseous access. Many authors have reported the effectiveness of intraosseous prophylaxis in achieving higher concentrations of antibiotic in the tissues compared with intravenous administration, providing equal or enhanced prophylaxis while minimizing adverse effects. This annotation describes the technique of intraosseous administration of antibiotics and summarizes the relevant clinical literature to date. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(11):1135–1139

Aims. The duration of systemic antibiotic treatment following first-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is contentious. Our philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, and to use a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics in cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. The aim of this study was to assess the success of this philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol. Methods. The study involved a retrospective review of our prospectively collected database from which we identified all patients who underwent an intended two-stage revision for PJI of the hip. All patients had a diagnosis of PJI according to the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2013, a minimum five-year follow-up, and were assessed using the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool. The outcomes were grouped into ‘successful’ or ‘unsuccessful’. Results. A total of 299 two-stage revision THAs in 289 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 258 (86%) proceeded to second-stage surgery. Their mean age was 68.1 years (28 to 92). The median follow-up was 10.7 years (interquartile range (IQR) 6.3 to 15.0). A 91% success rate was seen in those patients who underwent reimplantation, decreasing to 86% when including those who did not proceed to reimplantation. The median duration of postoperative systemic antibiotics following the first stage was five days (IQR 5 to 9). There was no significant difference in outcome between those patients who were treated with antibiotics for ≤ 48 hours (p = 0.961) or ≤ five days (p = 0.376) compared with those who were treated with longer courses. Greater success rates were seen for Gram-positive PJIs (87%) than for Gram-negative (84%) and mixed-Gram PJIs (72%; p = 0.098). Conclusion. Aggressive surgical debridement with a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics at the time of first-stage revision surgery for PJI of the hip, without prolonged systemic antibiotics, provides a high rate of success, responsible antibiotic stewardship, and reduced hospital costs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):511–517

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and impact of tourniquet use in patients undergoing limb salvage surgery with endoprosthetic reconstruction for a tumour around the knee. Methods. We retrieved data from the Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial; specifically, differences in baseline characteristics, surgical details, and postoperative functional outcomes between patients who had undergone surgery under tourniquet and those who had not. A linear regression model was created to evaluate the impact of tourniquet use on postoperative Toronto Extremity Salvage Scores (TESSs) while controlling for confounding variables. A negative-binomial regression model was constructed to explore predictors of postoperative length of stay (LOS). Results. Of the 604 patients enrolled in the PARITY trial, 421 had tumours around the knee joint, of whom 225 (53%) underwent surgery under tourniquet. The tourniquet group was younger (p = 0.014), more likely to undergo surgery for a tumour of the tibia, and had shorter operating times by a mean of 50 minutes (95% confidence interval 30 to 72; p < 0.001). The adjusted linear regression model found that the use of a tourniquet, a shorter operating time, and a higher baseline TESS independently predicted better function at both three- and six-month follow-up. The negative-binomial regression model showed that tourniquet use, shorter operating time, younger age, and intraoperative tranexamic acid administration independently predicted a shorter LOS in hospital. Conclusion. The results of this study show that in patients undergoing resection of a tumour around the knee and endoprosthetic reconstruction, the use of an intraoperative tourniquet is associated with a shorter operating time, a reduced length of stay in hospital, and a better early functional outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(10):1168–1173

Prophylactic antibiotics can decrease the risk of wound infection and have been routinely employed in orthopaedic surgery for decades. Despite their widespread use, questions still surround the selection of antibiotics for prophylaxis, timing and duration of administration. The health economic costs associated with wound infections are significant, and the judicious but appropriate use of antibiotics can reduce this risk. This review examines the evidence behind commonly debated topics in antibiotic prophylaxis and highlights the uses and advantages of some commonly used antibiotics. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1014–19

A retrospective study of 44 diabetic patients who, between them, had 62 Charnley low-friction arthroplasties, showed a superficial-infection rate of 9.7 per cent and a deep-infection rate of 5.6 per cent. All the operations were carried out in the Charnley clear-air enclosure and prophylactic antibiotics were not used. A statistically significant increase in the overall rate of infection was found in diabetic patients when compared with non-diabetic osteoarthritic patients (P less than 0.001) and rheumatoid patients (P less than 0.01). Hence it is suggested that in diabetic patients there may well be a place for prophylactic antibiotics in hip replacement surgery in addition to the use of the clean-air enclosure

Aims. Demineralised bone matrix (DBM) is rarely used for the local delivery of prophylactic antibiotics. Our aim, in this study, was to show that a graft with a bioactive glass and DBM combination, which is currently available for clinical use, can be loaded with tobramycin and release levels of antibiotic greater than the minimum inhibitory concentration for Staphylococcus aureus without interfering with the bone healing properties of the graft, thus protecting the graft and surrounding tissues from infection. Materials and Methods. Antibiotic was loaded into a graft and subsequently evaluated for drug elution kinetics and the inhibition of bacterial growth. A rat femoral condylar plug model was used to determine the effect of the graft, loaded with antibiotic, on bone healing. Results. We found that tobramycin loaded into a graft composed of bioglass and DBM eluted antibiotic above the minimum inhibitory concentration for three days in vitro. It was also found that the antibiotic loaded into the graft produced no adverse effects on the bone healing properties of the DBM at a lower level of antibiotic. Conclusion. This antibiotic-loaded bone void filler may represent a promising option for the delivery of local antibiotics in orthopaedic surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1126–31

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

Aims. Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a serious complication that is associated with high morbidity and costs. The aim of this study was to prepare a systematic review to examine patient-related and perioperative risk factors that can be modified in an attempt to reduce the rate of PJI. Materials and Methods. A search of PubMed and MEDLINE was conducted for articles published between January 1990 and February 2018 with a combination of search terms to identify studies that dealt with modifiable risk factors for reducing the rate of PJI. An evidence-based review was performed on 12 specific risk factors: glycaemic control, obesity, malnutrition, smoking, vitamin D levels, preoperative Staphylococcus aureus screening, the management of anti-rheumatic medication, perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, presurgical skin preparation, the operating room environment, irrigant options, and anticoagulation. Results. Poor glycaemic control, obesity, malnutrition, and smoking are all associated with increased rates of PJI. Vitamin D replacement has been shown in preliminary animal studies to decrease rates of PJI. Preoperative Staphylococcus aureus screening and appropriate treatment results in decreased rates of PJI. Perioperative variables, such as timely and appropriate dosage of prophylactic antibiotics, skin preparation with chlorohexidine-based solution, and irrigation with dilute betadine at the conclusion of the operation, have all been associated with reduced rates of PJI. Similarly, aggressive anticoagulation and increased operating room traffic should be avoided to help minimize risk of PJI. Conclusion. PJI remains a serious complication of arthroplasty. Surgeons should be vigilant of the modifiable risk factors that can be addressed in an attempt to reduce the risk of PJI

Objectives. As tumours of bone and soft tissue are rare, multicentre prospective collaboration is essential for meaningful research and evidence-based advances in patient care. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators encountered in large-scale collaborative research by orthopaedic oncological surgeons involved or interested in prospective multicentre collaboration. Methods. All surgeons who were involved, or had expressed an interest, in the ongoing Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial were invited to participate in a focus group to discuss their experiences with collaborative research in this area. The discussion was digitally recorded, transcribed and anonymised. The transcript was analysed qualitatively, using an analytic approach which aims to organise the data in the language of the participants with little theoretical interpretation. Results. The 13 surgeons who participated in the discussion represented orthopaedic oncology practices from seven countries (Argentina, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Denmark, United States and Canada). Four categories and associated themes emerged from the discussion: the need for collaboration in the field of orthopaedic oncology due to the rarity of the tumours and the need for high level evidence to guide treatment; motivational factors for participating in collaborative research including establishing proof of principle, learning opportunity, answering a relevant research question and being part of a collaborative research community; barriers to participation including funding, personal barriers, institutional barriers, trial barriers, and administrative barriers and facilitators for participation including institutional facilitators, leadership, authorship, trial set-up, and the support of centralised study coordination. Conclusions. Orthopaedic surgeons involved in an ongoing international randomised controlled trial (RCT) were motivated by many factors to participate. There were a number of barriers to and facilitators for their participation. There was a collective sense of fatigue experienced in overcoming these barriers, which was mirrored by a strong collective sense of the importance of, and need for, collaborative research in this field. The experiences were described as essential educational first steps to advance collaborative studies in this area. Knowledge gained from this study will inform the development of future large-scale collaborative research projects in orthopaedic oncology. Cite this article: J. S. Rendon, M. Swinton, N. Bernthal, M. Boffano, T. Damron, N. Evaniew, P. Ferguson, M. Galli Serra, W. Hettwer, P. McKay, B. Miller, L. Nystrom, W. Parizzia, P. Schneider, A. Spiguel, R. Vélez, K. Weiss, J. P. Zumárraga, M. Ghert. Barriers and facilitators experienced in collaborative prospective research in orthopaedic oncology: A qualitative study. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:–314. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.65.BJR-2016-0192.R1

Objectives. The diagnosis of surgical site infection following endoprosthetic reconstruction for bone tumours is frequently a subjective diagnosis. Large clinical trials use blinded Central Adjudication Committees (CACs) to minimise the variability and bias associated with assessing a clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to determine the level of inter-rater and intra-rater agreement in the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial. Materials and Methods. The Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial CAC adjudicated 29 non-PARITY cases of lower extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction. The CAC members classified each case according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) criteria for surgical site infection (superficial, deep, or organ space). Combinatorial analysis was used to calculate the smallest CAC panel size required to maximise agreement. A final meeting was held to establish a consensus. Results. Full or near consensus was reached in 20 of the 29 cases. The Fleiss kappa value was calculated as 0.44 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 0.53), or moderate agreement. The greatest statistical agreement was observed in the outcome of no infection, 0.61 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.72, substantial agreement). Panelists reached a full consensus in 12 of 29 cases and near consensus in five of 29 cases when CDC criteria were used (superficial, deep or organ space). A stable maximum Fleiss kappa of 0.46 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.35) at CAC sizes greater than three members was obtained. Conclusions. There is substantial agreement among the members of the PARITY CAC regarding the presence or absence of surgical site infection. Agreement on the level of infection, however, is more challenging. Additional clinical information routinely collected by the prospective PARITY trial may improve the discriminatory capacity of the CAC in the parent study for the diagnosis of infection. Cite this article: J. Nuttall, N. Evaniew, P. Thornley, A. Griffin, B. Deheshi, T. O’Shea, J. Wunder, P. Ferguson, R. L. Randall, R. Turcotte, P. Schneider, P. McKay, M. Bhandari, M. Ghert. The inter-rater reliability of the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:347–352. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.58.BJR-2016-0036.R1