No abstract

Background: The optimal timing of surgical intervention for multiligament knee injuries remains controversial. Purpose: To review the clinical and functional outcomes after acute and delayed surgical intervention for multiligament knee injuries. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We performed a search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception to September 2020. Eligible studies reported on knee dislocations, multiligament knee injuries, or bicruciate ligament injuries in adult patients (age, ≥18 years). In addition to comparing outcomes between acute and delayed surgical intervention groups, we conducted 3 subgroup analyses for outcomes within isolated knee injuries, knee injuries with concomitant polytrauma/fractures, and high-level (level 2) studies. Results: Included in the analysis were 31 studies, designated as evidence level 2 (n = 3), level 3 (n = 8), and level 4 (n = 20). These studies reported on 2594 multiligament knee injuries sustained by 2585 patients (mean age, 25.1-65.3 years; mean follow-up, 12-157.2 months). At the latest follow-up timepoint, the mean Lysholm (n = 375), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) (n = 286), and Tegner (n = 129) scores for the acute surgical intervention group were 73.60, 67.61, and 5.06, respectively. For the delayed surgical intervention group, the mean Lysholm (n = 196), IKDC (n = 172), and Tegner (n = 74) scores were 85.23, 72.32, and 4.85, respectively. The mean Lysholm (n = 323), IKDC (n = 236), and Tegner (n = 143) scores for our isolated subgroup were 83.7, 74.8, and 5.0, respectively. By comparison, the mean Lysholm (n = 270), IKDC (n = 236), and Tegner (n = 206) scores for the polytrauma/fractures subgroup were 83.3, 64.5, and 5.0, respectively. Conclusion: The results of our systematic review did not elucidate whether acute or delayed surgical intervention produced superior clinical and functional outcomes. Although previous evidence has supported acute surgical intervention, future prospective randomized controlled trials and matched cohort studies must be completed to confirm these findings.

No abstract

BACKGROUNDHospitalized patients with suspected tuberculosis (TB) are placed in airborne isolation until 3 sputum smear samples are negative for acid-fast bacilli (AFB). The Xpert MTB/RIF assay ("Xpert") nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) to identify Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA and resistance to rifampicin is superior to AFB sputum smear microscopy for the diagnosis of TB.OBJECTIVETo compare the performance of a single Xpert to AFB smear microscopy for time to airborne infection isolation (AII) discontinuation.METHODSConsecutive patients over 17 years of age in AII for suspected pulmonary TB between October 1, 2014, and March 31, 2016, with leftover respiratory AFB samples were enrolled in this study. A single Xpert was performed on the first available sample. Demographic, clinical, and microbiological data were recorded for each patient. We compared the duration of AII using a single Xpert to AFB smear microscopy under multiple theoretical scenarios using Kaplan-Meier cumulative incidence curves and the log-rank test.RESULTSIn total, 131 samples were included in our performance analysis of the Xpert, and 114 samples were included in our AII analysis. Overall, 81 patients (65%) were immunosuppressed, of whom 46 (37%) were positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The sensitivity and specificity of Xpert for diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection were 67% and 100%, respectively. Xpert was negative in all cases of nontuberculous mycobacteria. Use of a single Xpert reduced AII duration from a median of 67 hours per patient to 42 hours with usual reporting, to 26 hours with direct communication, and to 12 hours with immediate testing.CONCLUSIONSA single negative Xpert result can reduce AII duration compared to the AFB smear microscopy technique under multiple theoretical scenarios.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:590-595.