No abstract

Background The septic arthritis of the hip is a complex condition characterized by a variety of clinical presentations, a challenging diagnosis and different surgical treatment options, including arthroscopy, resection arthroplasty and one and two-stage total hip replacement. Each technique reports variable results in terms of infection eradication rate. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the most relevant studies available in current literature and to assess if a better treatment outcome can be predicted based on the microbiology, history, and type of infection (active vs quiescent) of each case. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, including the studies dealing with the treatment of hip septic arthritis in adult patients. Electronic databases, namely the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, were reviewed using a combination of following keywords “septic arthritis” AND “hip joint” OR “hip” AND “adult”. Results The total number of patients included in this review was 1236 (45% of which females), for 1238 hips. The most common pathogen isolated was Staphylococcus aureus in its Methicillin-sensitive variant ranging from 2 to 37% of cases. Negative cultures were the second most common finding. It was also differentiated the type of infection of the hip, 809 and 417 patients with active and quiescent hip infection, respectively, were analyzed. Eradication rates for two-stage revision arthroplasty ranged between 85 and 100%, for one-stage approach between 94 and 100%, while for arthroscopic debridement/lavage between 89 and 100%. Conclusion Staphylococcus aureus is the most common microorganism isolated followed by culture negative infections. Arthroscopic, one and two stage procedures can be effective in the treatment of hip septic arthritis when the indication is consistent with the type of infection retrieved. Level of evidence IV, therapeutic study.

Objectives The current literature on diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) provides controversial evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer. Therefore, this critical literature search and meta-analysis was aimed to summarize the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer for diagnosing PJI. Content We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, for studies on D-dimer for diagnosing PJI, according to the PRISMA flowchart. QUADAS was used for assessing study quality. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were analyzed using bivariate diagnostic random-effects model. The area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC-ROC) was calculated. Subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression were carried out for detecting potential sources of heterogeneity. Summary We included 12 articles, totaling 1,818 patients (539 with PJI). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of D-dimer for diagnosing PJI were 0.739 (95% CI: 0.616–0.833) and 0.785 (95% CI: 0.679–0.863). The pooled PLR, NLR, DOR were 3.359 (95% CI, 2.340–4.821), 0.295 (95% CI, 0.180–0.484), and 11.787 (95% CI, 5.785–24.018). The cumulative ROC plot displayed an AUC of 0.688 (95% CI, 0.663–0.713; p<0.001). No threshold effects could be observed. The type of blood sample was identified as possible source of heterogeneity for DOR (p=0.01). Outlook Evidence emerged from this meta-analysis suggests that D-dimer displays sufficient diagnostic accuracy to rule out PJI. The type of blood sample (plasma vs. serum) and the study design could influence the results in terms of DOR and sensitivity. However, further perspective studies would be needed to validate its potential diagnostic usefulness.

Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) can be used as a first surgical procedure for acute infections in patients who have well-fixed components. However, its use in hematogenous or late acute infections is still debated. This systematic review of literature aims to clarify the effectiveness of DAIR procedure in the treatment of hematogenous periprosthetic knee infections. DAIR is an effective way to treat acute hematogenous PJIs of the knee and reaches its best efficacy when performed within one week from the onset of symptoms, modular components are exchanged, and a pathogen-oriented antibiotic therapy can be set. It is safe, economic, and effective technique, but has to be performed in a very narrow temporal window.

Background: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is a common procedure in orthopedic practice. Infections are uncommon complications of this procedure with an incidence rate of 0,01% -3,4%. Staphylococcus spp are the predominant causative agents in such cases. We present a case of knee septic arthritis caused by α-hemolytic Streptococcus.Case presentation: A 22-year-old woman diagnosed with obesity (body mass index [BMI] 35 kg/m 2 ) but with no other major comorbidities underwent an arthroscopic selective meniscectomy with administration of intravenous cefazolin for antibiotic prophylaxis. After an uneventful period of 2 months, the patient returned with pain, fever and a discharging sinus at the site of anterolateral arthroscopic portal. Blood tests and magnetic resonance imaging revealed osteomyelitis involving the tibial plate. Cultures of synovial fluid obtained from the knee and a pharyngeal swab yielded α-hemolytic Streptococcus. Five days later, the patient underwent arthroscopic debridement with partial synovectomy. Intraoperative specimens yielded α-hemolytic Streptococcus. The patient received intravenous piperacillin/tazobactam, followed by an associative regimen of amoxicillin and clindamycin with clinical, laboratory and instrumental evidence of symptom resolution. Conclusion: The incidence of knee septic arthritis after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is 0.01-3.4%. This infection is usually caused by Staphylococcus spp. and in rare cases by commensal bacteria, such as α-hemolytic streptococci, secondary to transient bacteremia. Screening of the colonized area is important to prevent possible transient bacteremia. Diagnosis is based on isolation of the causative organisms from synovial fluid cultures, and treatment comprises arthroscopic debridement with individualized systemic antibiotic therapy based on the results of an antibiogram.

Background: Single-stage hardware removal and total hip arthroplasty is a complex surgical procedure, comparable to revision surgery. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate single-stage hardware removal and THA outcomes, compare this technique with a matched control group that has undergone primary THA and assess the risk of periprosthetic joint infection with a 24-month minimum follow-up. Methods: This study included all those cases treated with THA and concomitant hardware removal from 2008 to 2018. The control group was selected on a 1:1 ratio among patients who underwent THA for primary OA. The Harris Hip (HHS) and University of California at Los Angeles Activity (UCLA) scores, infection rate and early and delayed surgical complications were recorded. Results: One hundred and twenty-three consecutive patients (127 hips) were included, and the same number of patients was assigned to the control group. The final functional scores were comparable between the two groups; a longer operative time and transfusion rate were recorded in the study group. Finally, an increased incidence of overall complications was reported (13.8% versus 2.4%), but no cases of early or delayed infection were found. Conclusions: Single-stage hardware removal and THA is a safe and effective but technically demanding technique, with a higher incidence of overall complications, making it more similar to revision THA than to primary THA.

Peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) dramatically affect human health, as they are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Two-stage revision arthroplasty is currently the gold standard treatment for PJI and consists of infected implant removal, an accurate debridement, and placement of antimicrobial impregnated poly-methyl-metha-acrylate (PMMA) spacer. The use of antibiotic-loaded PMMA (ALPMMA) spacers have showed a success rate that ranges from 85% to 100%. ALPMMA spacers, currently available on the market, demonstrate a series of disadvantages, closely linked to a low propensity to customize, seen as the ability to adapt to the patients’ anatomical characteristics, with consequential increase of surgical complexity, surgery duration, and post-operative complications. Conventionally, ALPMMA spacers are available only in three or four standard sizes, with the impossibility of guaranteeing the perfect matching of ALPMMA spacers with residual bone (no further bone loss) and gap filling. In this paper, a 3D model of an ALPMMA spacer is introduced to evaluate the cause- effect link between the geometric characteristics and the correlated clinical improvements. The result is a multivariable-oriented design able to effectively manage the size, alignment, stability, and the patients’ anatomical matching. The preliminary numerical results, obtained by using an “ad hoc” 3D virtual planning simulator, clearly point out that to restore the joint line, the mechanical and rotational alignment and the surgeon’s control on the thicknesses (distal and posterior thicknesses) of the ALPMMA spacer is mandatory. The numerical simulations campaign involved nineteen patients grouped in three different scenarios (Case N° 1, Case N° 2 and Case N° 3) whose 3D bone models were obtained through an appropriate data management strategy. Each scenario is characterized by a different incidence rate. In particular, the observed rates of occurrence are, respectively, equal to 17% (Case N° 1), 74% (Case N° 2), and 10% (Case N° 3).

Introduction Knee septic arthritis rapidly damages the knee joint. Gächter described a classification of joint infections based on arthroscopic findings: an arthroscopic staging of the common disease has prognostic and therapeutic consequences. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the application of the Gächter classification system to knee septic arthritis, evaluating prognostic and therapeutic implications of this classification. Materials and Methods A comprehensive electronic search of the literature was performed. The following search terms were used: (Arthroscopy* OR Arthrotom* OR Aspiration) AND Knee AND Septic AND Arthritis. The study reported the Gächter classification in septic knee arthritis and the eradication rate according to the type. The primary endpoint is the eradication rate of septic knee arthritis according to the Gächter sort. Secondary endpoints are surgical procedures according to Gächter classification and the rate of re-operations. Results Seven studies were included. The overall eradication rate of knee septic arthritis ranged from 90% to 100%: 95%-100% Gächter I; 97%-100% Gächter II; 67%-100% Gächter III; 50%-100% Gächter IV. Surgical treatments for knee septic arthritis included arthroscopic irrigation alone, articular irrigation, and debridement in knee arthroscopy or knee arthrotomy according to Gächter stage. However, 28% required re-operations for persistent infection: secondary procedures included further irrigation and debridement with the arthroscopic or arthrotomic approach. Conclusion Gächter classification showed a crucial prognostic role in predicting the outcome of surgical treatment of septic knee arthritis. Regardless of the procedure performed, a prompt operation and an accurate debridement of the synovial membrane are the most critical factors for eradicating infection and good clinical outcomes. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study