Gram-negative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been poorly studied despite its rapidly increasing incidence. Treatment with one-stage revision using intra-articular (IA) infusion of antibiotics may offer a reasonable alternative with a distinct advantage of providing a means of delivering the drug in high concentrations. Carbapenems are regarded as the last line of defense against severe Gram-negative or polymicrobial infection. This study presents the results of one-stage revision using intra-articular carbapenem infusion for treating Gram-negative PJI, and analyzes the characteristics of bacteria distribution and drug sensitivity. We retrospectively reviewed 32 patients (22 hips and 11 knees) who underwent single-stage revision combined with IA carbapenem infusion between November 2013 and March 2020. The IA and intravenous (IV) carbapenem infusions were administered for a single Gram-negative infection, and IV vancomycin combined with IA carbapenems and vancomycin was applied for polymicrobial infection including Gram-negative bacteria. The bacterial community distribution, drug sensitivity, infection control rate, functional recovery, and complications were evaluated. Reinfection or death caused by PJI was regarded as a treatment failure.Aims
Methods
A higher failure rate has been reported in haematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) compared to non-haematogenous PJI. The reason for this difference is unknown. We investigated the outcome of haematogenous and non-haematogenous PJI to analyze the risk factors for failure in both groups of patients. Episodes of knee or hip PJI (defined by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society criteria) treated at our institution between January 2015 and October 2020 were included in a retrospective PJI cohort. Episodes with a follow-up of > one year were stratified by route of infection into haematogenous and non-haematogenous PJI. Probability of failure-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared between groups using log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analysis was applied to assess risk factors for failure.Aims
Methods
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the
effect of various non-operative modalities of treatment (transcutaneous
electrical nerve stimulation (TENS); neuromuscular electrical stimulation
(NMES); insoles and bracing) on the pain of osteoarthritis (OA)
of the knee. We conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting
Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify
the therapeutic options which are commonly adopted for the management
of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. The outcome measurement tools used in the different studies were
the visual analogue scale and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities
Arthritis Index pain index: all pain scores were converted to a
100-point scale. A total of 30 studies met our inclusion criteria: 13 on insoles,
seven on TENS, six on NMES, and four on bracing. The standardised
mean difference (SMD) in pain after treatment with TENS was 1.796,
which represented a significant reduction in pain. The significant
overall effect estimate for NMES on pain was similar to that of
TENS, with a SMD of 1.924. The overall effect estimate of insoles
on pain was a SMD of 0.992. The overall effect of bracing showed
a significant reduction in pain of 1.34. Overall, all four non-operative modalities of treatment were
found to have a significant effect on the reduction of pain in OA
of the knee. This study shows that non-operative physical modalities of treatment
are of benefit when treating OA of the knee. However, much of the
literature reviewed evaluates studies with follow-up of less than
six months: future work should aim to evaluate patients with longer
follow-up. Cite this article:
