Treatment of septic arthritis of the knee: a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy

Risk Factors for Failure to Eradicate Infection after Single Arthroscopic Debridement in Septic Arthritis of a Native Knee Joint

PURPOSE

To identify the risk factors and effect of empirical glycopeptide on the failure of single arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis in a native knee joint.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis from March 2005 to December 2022 at one institution were included in this study. Demographic data, comorbidities, preoperative factors including history of previous surgery, history of injection, laboratory data including preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count, isolated pathogens from synovial fluid culture, and Gachter stage were analyzed. Statistical analyses using univariate and logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

Out of 132 patients, 17 patients (12.9%) had more than one additional arthroscopic debridement. History of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p<0.001), previous injection (p=0.041), isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (p=0.010), and high Gachter stage (p=0.002) were identified as risk factors, whereas age, history of previous knee surgery at the affected knee, CRP level, preoperative WBC, and preoperative neutrophil count of synovial fluid had no significant relation. Logistic regression analysis showed significant increase of risk in patients with DM [odds ratio (OR) 12.002, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.243-44.418, p<0.001], previous injection history (OR 4.812, 95% CI 1.367-16.939, p=0.017), and isolation of Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (OR 4.804, 95% CI 1.282-18.001, p=0.031) as independent risk factors for failure of infection eradication after single arthroscopic debridement.

CONCLUSION

Comorbidity of DM, history of previous injection, isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid, and high Gachter stage were associated with a higher risk of failure to eradicate infection with a single arthroscopic procedure. Empirical glycopeptide administration also showed no significant benefit in reducing the risk of additional surgical procedures for infection control, suggesting against the routine administration of glycopeptide.

Survival and risk factor analysis in patients with septic arthritis: a retrospective study of 192 cases

BACKGROUND

Septic arthritis (SA) presents a complex clinical challenge, often resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to (1) assess overall mortality rates and (2) identify potential factors contributing to increased mortality risk in patients with SA.

METHODS

This retrospective study on SA patients treated at a German university hospital between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2021. Patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes for septic arthritis, specifically "M00.-". The study evaluated mortality rates and analyzed comorbidities, pathogens, and other potential risk factors. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and odds ratios (OR) were calculated to assess mortality risk.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 192 patients diagnosed with SA, 64 patients (33.3%) died during a mean follow-up period of 54.4 ± 42 months. The overall mortality rate was 17.5% at one year, 19.9% at two years, and 28.3% at five years. Patients aged 65 years or older, as well as those with arterial hypertension, congestive heart failure, chronic renal disease, chronic liver disease, malignancy, steroid use and immunosuppression showed significantly higher mortality rates (p < 0.05). Chronic renal disease (OR = 2.80), malignancy (OR = 3.40), and chronic heart failure (OR = 2.62) were identified as significant notably risk factors for mortality.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights a notably high mortality rate among vulnerable patients with SA, particularly those with pre-existing comorbidities. Recognizing and addressing these risk factors early could improve patient outcomes. These results unterscore the need for close monitoring of SA patients, particularly those with chronic organ conditions, and timely intervention for sepsis to reduce mortality risk.

Arthroscopy Is at Least as Effective as Arthrotomy for Treatment of Septic Arthritis in Adults: A Systematic Review of Large and Intermediate Joints

BACKGROUND

Surgical options for septic arthritis include open arthrotomy or an arthroscopic procedure. The optimal surgical technique remains a matter of debate as acceptable results have been reported for both.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopy versus arthrotomy for the treatment of septic arthritis in large and intermediate-sized joints.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A literature search was performed of the PubMed and Cochrane online databases through September 2023 identifying articles comparing arthroscopy with arthrotomy for the treatment of septic arthritis. Eligible articles included retrospective or prospective comparative studies investigating reoperation, perioperative complications, or clinical outcomes after arthroscopic or open treatment for septic arthritis of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, or ankle in adults.

RESULTS

In total, 23 articles with 34,248 patients met the inclusion criteria comparing arthroscopy with arthrotomy. In 14 of the 20 (70%) studies that reported on reoperation rates, there was no significant difference in arthroscopic versus open surgical management for septic arthritis. Four (20%) studies reported lower reoperation rates when arthroscopy was utilized compared with open arthrotomy. One single-institution study found arthrotomy to be more effective for shoulder septic arthritis, and another favored open surgery only in the presence of erosions. In 11 of 23 (47.8%) studies, no difference in complications or clinical outcomes was found. However, 11 of 23 (47.8%) studies comprising the shoulder, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle reported a significant benefit to arthroscopy for improved outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of septic arthritis involving the shoulder, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle appears to be safe and effective. Reoperation rates, short-term complications, and functional outcomes tend to be similar or in favor of arthroscopy when compared with arthrotomy.

Arthroscopy or arthrotomy for native knee septic arthritis: A systematic review

Purpose

Septic arthritis of any joint is an orthopaedic emergency which requires prompt diagnosis and treatment. The knee is the commonest joint afflicted, and the primary objective of any treatment is complete source control. This commonly takes the form of antibiotic therapy and a washout of the infected joint by means of arthroscopy or arthrotomy. The primary aim of this review is to investigate if arthroscopic washout for native knee septic arthritis confers a lower risk of repeat procedure than arthrotomy.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of the MEDLINE, SCOPUS and the Cochrane Library data bases. The primary outcome of interest was requirement for repeat washout with all-cause complications, length of inpatient stay and mortality secondary outcomes.

Results

A total of 17,140 subjects were included for analysis of the primary outcome, and the overall rate of repeat procedure was 14.6%. No statistical difference was found between arthroscopy and arthrotomy for repeat washout (risk ratio 0.86 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.72-1.02], I 2 = 36%). Eligible studies found in favour of arthroscopy for all-cause complication rate (risk ratio 0.75 [95% CI: 0.6-0.93], I 2 = 84%) and length of stay in hospital (mean difference -1.98 days [95% CI: -3.43 to -0.53], I 2 = 84%). No statistical difference was found for the mortality rate (risk ratio 1.17 [95% CI: 0.52-2.63], I 2 = 57%).

Conclusion

Our analysis found arthroscopy and open arthrotomy to be equivocal for repeat surgical washout in native knee septic arthritis. All-cause complication rate and length of inpatient stay were favourable for arthroscopy with no difference noted between mortality rates.

Level of Evidence

Level III.

Associations with unplanned repeat irrigation and debridement of native septic arthritis

PURPOSE

To identify associations with unplanned repeat irrigation and debridement (I&D) after arthrotomy for native septic arthritis.

METHODS

A retrospective review identified patients with native septic arthritis treated with open arthrotomies. The primary outcome was unplanned repeat I&D within 90 days. Associations evaluated for included comorbidities, ability to bear weight, fever, immunosuppressed status, purulence, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, white blood cell count (synovial fluid and serum levels), and synovial fluid polymorphonuclear cell percentage (PMN%).

RESULTS

There were 59 arthrotomies in 53 patients involving the knee (n = 32), shoulder (n = 10), elbow (n = 8), ankle (n = 6), and hip (n = 3). The median patient age was 52, and a 71.2% were male. An unplanned repeat I&D was required in 40.7% (n = 24). The median time to the second I&D was 4 days (interquartile range 3 to 9). On univariate analysis, unplanned repeat I&Ds were associated with fever (p = 0.03), purulence (p = 0.01), bacteria growth on cultures (p = 0.02), and the use of deep drains (p = 0.05). On multivariate analysis, the only variables that remained associated with unplanned repeat I&Ds were fever (odds ratio (OR) 5.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3, 23.6, p = 0.02) and purulence (OR 5.3, CI 1.1, 24.4, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

An unplanned repeat I&D was required in 40.7% of patients and was associated with fever and purulence. These findings highlight the difficulty of controlling these infections and support the need for future research into better methods of management.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic, Level III.

Does arthroscopic or open washout in native knee septic arthritis result in superior post-operative function? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies

AIMS

Septic arthritis (SA) of the native knee joint is associated with significant morbidity. This review compared post-operative functional outcomes (patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and range of movement (ROM)) following arthroscopic washout (AW) and open washout (OW) amongst adult patients with SA of the native knee. The need for further operative intervention was also considered.

METHODS

Electronic databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science and Scopus were searched between 16 February 2023 and 18 March 2023. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational analytic studies comparing function (reflected in PROMs or ROM) at latest follow-up following AW and OW were included. A narrative summary was provided concerning post-operative PROMs. Pooled estimates for mean ROM and re-operation rates were conducted using the random-effects model. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool-2 for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool for observational analytic studies.

RESULTS

Of 2580 retrieved citations, 7 articles (1 RCT and 6 cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria. Of these, five had some concerns/moderate risk of bias, and two had serious risk. There was a slight tendency for superior mean PROMs following AW compared with OW, but due to small effect sizes, this was unlikely clinically relevant. Additionally, the use of four different PROMs scales made direct comparisons impossible. AW was associated with superior ROM (mean difference 20.18° (95% CI 14.35, 26.02; p < 0.00001)), whilst there was a tendency for lower re-operation requirements following AW (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.26, 1.57, p = 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

AW was associated with equivalent to superior post-operative function and lower requirement for further intervention compared with OW. Results need to be interpreted cautiously, taking into consideration the methodological and clinical heterogeneity of the included studies.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2022, CRD42022364062.

Arthroscopic Treatment Is a Safe and Effective Alternative to Open Treatment for Acute Septic Arthritis of the Native Knee: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To compare complication rates, reoperation rates, and subjective outcomes after arthroscopic and open irrigation and debridement for treatment of native knee septic arthritis.

METHODS

Following The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed databases was performed. Comparative studies reporting clinical outcomes after arthroscopic versus open treatment for septic arthritis of the native knee in human adults were included. Excluded were case series with <10 patients, inclusion of patients <18 years old, studies on non-native joints, abstract-only publications, and studies without stratification of the involved joint. Two reviewers in duplicate independently performed search and data extraction. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies instrument. The mean score among the included studies was 18.2 (range 16-23).

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included, comprising 2,343 knees treated arthroscopically, and 1,595 treated with arthrotomy. Studies reported no differences in erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, peripheral white blood cells, or symptom chronicity between groups. Nine studies (81.8%) attempted to control for potentially confounding variables in their analyses, and 4 studies (36.4%) reported significant differences in patient characteristics. Reoperation rates ranged from 0% to 50% for arthroscopy and 6% to 71% for arthrotomy. Complication rates ranged from 0% to 39.4% arthroscopically and 0% to 49% for arthrotomy. Superior patient-reported outcomes were achieved after arthroscopy in 2 studies that analyzed subjective outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic management of native knee septic arthritis is a safe and effective alternative to open treatment and is associated with comparable complication rates, reoperation rates, hospitalization lengths, readmission rates, and superior patient-reported outcomes compared with open irrigation and debridement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I, III, and IV studies.

Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is successful in the management of acutely infected unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a case series

BACKGROUND

Infections are rare and poorly studied complications of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) surgery. They are significantly less common compared to infections after total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). Optimal management of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) after a UKA is not clearly defined in the literature. This article presents the results of the largest multicentre clinical study of UKA PJIs treated with Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective case series, patients presenting between January 2016 and December 2019 with early UKA infection were identified at three specialist centres using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. All patients underwent a standardized treatment protocol consisting of the DAIR procedure and antibiotic therapy comprising two weeks of intravenous (IV) antibiotics followed by six weeks of oral therapy. The main outcome measure was overall survivorship free from reoperation for infection.

RESULTS

A total of 3225 UKAs (2793 (86.2%) medial and 432 (13.8%) lateral UKAs) were performed between January 2016 and December 2019. Nineteen patients had early infections necessitating DAIR. The mean follow-up period was 32.5 months. DAIR showed an overall survivorship free from septic reoperation of 84.2%, with overall survivorship free from all-cause reoperation of 78.95%.The most common bacteria were Coagulase-negative Staphylococci, Staphylococcus aureus and Group B Streptococci. Three patients required a second DAIR procedure but remained free from re-infection at follow-up obviating the need for more demanding, staged revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In infected UKAs, the DAIR procedure produces a high rate of success, with a high survivorship of the implant.Key messagesDebridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR) is a successful and minimally invasive surgical option for the management of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) after UKA.The surface area available for bacteria to colonise is much smaller in UKAs compared to total knee arthroplasties (TKAs), and this may account for the higher success rates of the DAIR procedure in infected UKAs versus infected TKAs.A second DAIR procedure can be considered in the management of the early recurrence of PJIs with a well-fixed UKA.

Clinical efficacy of arthroscopy combined with irrigation and drainage in the treatment of brucellosis of the hip

PURPOSE

To evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy of hip arthroscopy combined with catheter irrigation and drainage in the treatment of brucellosis of the hip.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2020, 11 patients with a diagnosis of brucellosis-induced unilateral hip joint arthritis were treated with arthroscopic debridement and lesion synovectomy. Catheterization was performed during the operation, and normal saline lavage was continued after the operation. A regimen of doxycycline plus rifampicin, plus a third-generation cephalosporin in cases of refractory infections, were used for three months.

RESULTS

The rate of positive synovial bacterial culture during the operation was 91% (10/11). Postoperative pathological examination of 11 patients showed purulent arthritis; this result combined with the disease history led to the diagnosis of all patients with brucellosis of the hip. All patients were followed up for more than 24 months. From three months after surgery to the last follow-up, both ESR and CPR were within the normal range, but the VAS score decreased significantly (P < 0.05), and the mHHS and HOS-ADL scores increased significantly (P < 0.01). Compared with that on preoperative imaging, the measurement of the hip joint space on imaging at the last follow-up showed no significant change (P > 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic treatment of brucellosis in the hip joint not only preserves the joint fluid and lesion tissue for a clear diagnosis but also allows thorough removal of the infected and injured tissue during surgery. Hip arthroscopy combined with postoperative tube irrigation and drainage is an effective method for the diagnosis and treatment of brucellosis in the hip joint.

Failure rates in surgical treatment in adults with bacterial arthritis of a native joint: a systematic review of 8,586 native joints

INTRODUCTION

Most adult cases of bacterial-septic-arthritis of a native joint are effectively managed with a single surgical debridement, but some cases may require more than one debridement to control the infection. Consequently, this study assessed the failure rate of a single surgical debridement in adults with bacterial arthritis of a native joint. Additionally, risk factors for failure were assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021243460) before data collection and conducted in line with the 'Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses' (PRISMA) guidelines. Multiple libraries were systematically searched to identify articles including patients reporting on the incidence of failure (i.e. persistence of infection requiring reoperation) of the treatment of bacterial arthritis. The quality of individual evidence were assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Failure rates were extracted from included studies and pooled. Risk factors for failure were extracted and grouped. Moreover, we evaluated which risk factors were significantly associated with failure.

RESULTS

Thirty studies (8,586 native joints) were included in the final analysis. The overall pooled failure rate was 26% (95% CI 20 to 32%). The failure rate of arthroscopy and arthrotomy was 26% (95% CI 19 to 34%) and 24% (95% CI 17 to 33%), respectively. Seventy-nine potential risk factors were extracted and grouped. Moderate evidence was found for one risk factor (synovial white blood cell count), and limited evidence was found for five risk factors (i.e. sepsis, large joint infection, the volume of irrigation, blood urea nitrogen-test, and blood urea nitrogen/creatinine ratio).

CONCLUSION

A single surgical debridement fails to control bacterial arthritis of a native joint in approximately a quarter of all adult cases. Limited to moderate evidence exists that risk factors associated with failure are: synovial white blood cell count, sepsis, large joint infection, and the volume of irrigation. These factors should urge physicians to be especially receptive to signs of an adverse clinical course.

Re-operation rates of arthroscopic management versus arthrotomy in treatment of septic arthritis of native shoulder joint in adults. A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Previous studies have reported concern regarding high reoperation rates when septic arthritis of the native shoulder is treated arthroscopically, compared to open arthrotomy. We aimed to compare re-operation rate between the two strategies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The review was registered prospectively at PROSPERO, (CRD42021226518). We searched common databases and references lists (8 February 2021). The inclusion criteria included interventional or observational studies of adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of native shoulder joint septic arthritis and had either arthroscopy or arthrotomy. The exclusion criteria included patients with periprosthetic or post-surgical infections, patients who had atypical infections, and studies that did not report re-operation rate. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias (ROBINS-I) was used.

RESULTS

Nine studies (retrospective cohort studies) were included that involved 5,643 patients (5,645 shoulders). Mean age ranged from 55.6 to 75.5 years, and follow-up time ranged from 1-41 months. Mean duration of symptoms prior to presentation ranged from 8.3-23.3 days. Metanalysis observed a higher re-operation rate for reinfection at any time point following initial arthroscopy in comparison to arthrotomy, odds ratio 2.61 (95% confidence interval 1.04, 6.56). There was marked heterogeneity (I2 = 78.8%) among studies including surgical techniques and missing data.

CONCLUSION

This metanalysis observed a higher reoperation rate in arthroscopy in comparison to arthrotomy for the treatment of native shoulder septic arthritis in adults. The quality of the included evidence is low and the heterogeneity among included studies is marked. Higher quality evidence is still needed that address limitations of previous studies.

Arthroscopic versus open irrigation and debridement in native knee septic arthritis: A retrospective review

Introduction

Native knee septic arthritis is a rare condition with a potential for high morbidity if not promptly treated. Treatment involves surgical decompression of the affected joint along with systemic antibiotic therapy. The purpose of this study is to compare arthroscopic versus open irrigation and debridement for treatment of native knee septic arthritis.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted at a single academic institution of all patients treated for native knee septic arthritis from January 2007 until August 2018 utilizing ICD and CPT codes. Patient demographics, type of surgical procedure, need for reoperation, laboratory values, length of stay, and comorbidities were compared.

Results

A cohort of sixty-six patients who underwent 85 surgeries were included. Among these surgeries, 52 (61%) were arthroscopic while 33 (39%) were open arthrotomies, and 21% required more than one operation. While not statistically significant, the odds of reoperation was higher for those that underwent arthroscopic compared to open irrigation and debridement on univariable (OR = 4.05, p = .08) and multivariable analysis (OR = 4.39, p = .10). Additionally, patients were more likely to require a longer hospital stay if they initially underwent arthroscopic rather than open debridement (RR = 1.31, p = .02).

Conclusion

Native knee septic arthritis can be treated with a single surgery in the majority of cases. In our sample, there was an increased odds of reoperation in those treated arthroscopically compared to open, though this finding was not statistically significant. We found longer length of stay for patients undergoing arthroscopic rather than open irrigation and debridement - even after controlling for multiple operations, culture status, sex, age, and comorbidities.

Physiotherapeutic Approach for Septic Arthritis of Knee Joint

Septic arthritis is an orthopaedic emergency associated with poor prognosis in cases with delayed treatment. The standard routes through which the infection spreads are hematogenous and direct entry. Any delay in medicine could mean the patient facing severe joint destruction, limitation in joint range, and inability to do activities of daily living. Septic arthritis is treated with a multidisciplinary approach in which physiotherapy is essential in making patients functionally independent. This article discusses a 58-year-old male patient with pain and swelling in the right knee joint and difficulty doing activities like walking, squatting and climbing stairs. On further investigations and diagnostic arthroscopy, he was diagnosed with septic/pyogenic arthritis caused by Staphylococcus aureus in the right knee. The patient was being treated with antibiotics. Along with it, patient-tailored physiotherapy rehabilitation, including, but not limited to, strengthening, range of motion (ROM) exercises, endurance training, etc., was also given, which proved highly effective at enhancing the patient's functional independence and quality of life. The outcome measure used in this report is the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

Periprosthetic joint infection in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: treatment options and outcomes. What is the current evidence in literature?

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) following unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs) will increase. The aim of this review is to evaluate current evidence regarding treatment options, complications, clinical and radiological outcomes of PJI management in UKAs.

METHODS

A systematic review of English literature was performed. Retrospective and prospective studies providing treatment options, complications, clinical and radiological outcomes of PJI following UKAs were included. PJI type, treatment, survival rate with no reoperation for infection and survival rate with no reoperation for any cause were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included. Three studies focusing on PJI following UKA (45 cases) report a survival rate with no reoperation for infection of 68.9% and a survival rate with no reoperation for any cause of 48.9%. Eight articles concerning UKA failure modes (28 cases) overestimate survival rate with no reoperation for infection (88.9%) and survival rate with no reoperation for any cause (88.9%) (p < 0.05). DAIR reports a rate of infection eradication failure ranging from 43.8 to 100%. 1SE allows for a survival rate with no reoperation for infection of 100%. 2SE reports a rate of infection eradication failure ranging from 0 to 12.5%. A high rate of early aseptic reoperation is reported, despite infection eradication (20% in DAIR; 28.5% in 2SE).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment strategy is determined by symptom timing, PJI type (acute vs chronic), causative organism, patient's comorbidities. A longer duration of PJI or severe host and extremity status seems to require 2SE or 1SE. Patients who have a shorter duration of PJI could receive DAIR.

S. AUREUS IS ASSOCIATED WITH A GREATER NEED FOR REOPERATION IN SEPTIC ARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE

Objective

To determine the frequency of reoperations in the treatment of adult patients diagnosed with septic arthritis of the knee, the average number of debridements needed to control the infection, the mortality rate, and to assess factors associated with a greater need for reoperation and mortality.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study evaluating 38 adult patients diagnosed with septic arthritis who underwent arthrotomy via a medial parapatellar approach for joint cleaning and debridement. Demographic, clinical, surgical, and microbiological variables of the cases were analyzed by review of medical records. Tests for equality of two proportions, chi-square, and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed, defining a significance level at 0.05, with 95% confidence interval.

Results

A total of 50% of the cases underwent reoperation, with an average number of required debridement of 2.02 and a mortality rate of 10.5%. Patients with infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus were more likely to need a reoperation compared to patients with positive cultures for other agents (OR 6.0).

Conclusion

In 50% of cases, an average of 2.02 debridements were necessary and the mortality rate was 10.5%. Staphylococcus aureus infection is associated with a 6 times greater chance of additional surgeries. / Level of Evidence IV, Case Series.

Reduced Costs, Complications, and Length of Stay After Arthroscopic Versus Open Irrigation and Débridement for Knee Septic Arthritis

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of native knee bacterial septic arthritis, the optimal irrigation and débridement modality-arthroscopic versus open-is a matter of controversy. We aim to compare revision-free survival, complications, and resource utilization between these approaches.

METHODS

The National Readmission Database was queried from 2016 to 2019 to identify patients using International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, diagnostic and procedure codes. Days to revision irrigation and débridement (I&D), if any, were calculated for patients during index admission or subsequent readmissions. Multivariate regression was used for healthcare utilization analysis. Survival analysis was done using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression.

RESULTS

A total of 14,365 patients with native knee septic arthritis undergoing I&D were identified, 8,063 arthroscopic (56.1%) and 6,302 open (43.9%). The mean follow-up was 148 days (interquartile range 53 to 259). A total of 2,156 patients (15.0%) underwent revision I&D. On multivariate analysis, arthroscopic I&D was associated with a reduction in hospital costs of $5,674 and length of stay of 1.46 days (P < 0.001 for both). Arthroscopic I&D was associated with lower overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.63, P < 0.001), need for blood transfusion (OR 0.58, P < 0.001), and wound complications (OR 0.32, P < 0.001). Revision-free survival after index I&D was 95.3% at 3 days, 91.0% at 10 days, 88.3% at 30 days, 86.0% at 90 days, and 84.5% at 180 days. No statistically significant difference was observed between surgical approaches on Cox modeling.

DISCUSSION

Risk of revision I&D did not differ between arthroscopic and open I&D; however, arthroscopy was associated with decreased costs, length of stay, and complications. Additional study is necessary to confirm these findings and characterize which patients require an open I&D.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Raised initial total white cell count and lower post-operative decline of C reactive protein increases the risk of secondary surgery in septic arthritis of the native knee

PURPOSE

Septic arthritis is an orthopaedic emergency with high morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to determine the risk factors associated with secondary surgery for septic arthritis of the native knee joint.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study reviewing all patients who underwent surgery for septic arthritis of the knee from 2012 to 2019 in a single institution. A total of 117 patients were recruited. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Group I (79/117, 67.5%) underwent one surgery and Group II (38/117, 32.5%) underwent more than one surgery.

RESULTS

Patients with a raised initial total white (TW) cell count of > 20 × 10⁹/L had a significantly higher risk of secondary surgery. (Adjusted hazard ratio 2.42, p < 0.05) A decline of CRP level of less than 20% within 24 h from initial operation was also a risk for secondary surgery. (Adjusted hazard ratio 0.34, p < 0.01) Patients in group II also had significantly higher post-operative median TW cell count and neutrophil count. There was no significant difference in the offending microbe, surgical approach, and duration of operation from initial presentation between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with septic arthritis of the native knee joint who present with raised initial total white cell count of > 20 × 10⁹/L and decline of CRP level of less than 20% within 24 h from initial operation are at higher risk of secondary operation. In these patients, more aggressive treatment strategies and appropriate counselling on the risks of repeated surgery are recommended.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Management and outcome of native joint septic arthritis: a nationwide survey in French rheumatology departments, 2016-2017

OBJECTIVES

To describe current management and outcome of native joint septic arthritis (NJSA) in French rheumatology departments.

METHODS

For this retrospective, nationwide multicentric study, 127 French rheumatology departments were contacted to report up to 12 cases of NJSA that occurred between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017. Characteristics, diagnosis procedures, therapeutic management and outcome were recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, 362 patients were included (mean age 64.0±18.6 years, median Charlson comorbidity index 3.5 (0-14)). Knee was the most frequent site (n=160 (38.9%)), and Staphylococcus sp (n=185 (51.4%)), the most frequent pathogen. All patients received antibiotics for a mean duration of 46.8 (±22.0) days, including intravenous route for a mean of 17.2 (±15.4) days. Management was heterogeneous. Surgical procedure was performed in 171 (48.3%), joint immobilisation in 128 (43.8%). During follow-up, 91 (28.3%) patients have had serious complications and 28 (9.2%) of them died. Factors associated with 1-year mortality were age (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.13; p<0.001), Charlson's index (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.58; p=0.012), presence of bacteraemia (OR 4.02, 95% CI 1.35 to 11.99; p=0.008), antibiotic use in the previous 3 months (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 9.87; p=0.029) and Staphylococcus aureus NJSA compared with Streptococcus sp. NJSA (OR 7.24, 95% CI 1.26 to 41.68, p=0.027). The complete recovery with no adverse joint outcome at 1 year was observed in n=125/278 patients (55.0%).

CONCLUSION

Prognosis of NJSA remained severe with a high rate of morbimortality. Its management was very heterogeneous. This study highlights the importance of the new French recommendations, published after the completion of the study, in order to facilitate NJSA management.

Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention for an Early Periprosthetic Infection After Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Technical Note

Early periprosthetic joint infection in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is shown to have a detrimental effect on the success of UKA surgery not only because of the sequences of the infection but also due to the other healthy lateral compartment. It is well known that Oxford meniscal bearing UKA is a very precise procedure that the use of any excessive force may have an injurious effect on the future prosthesis stability with a higher risk of bearing dislocation. This technical note aims at describing how to deal with a case of early periprosthetic joint infection in a female patient who underwent debridement, wash, implant retention and change of the mobile bearing insert including the demonstration of a difficult step during this procedure.

Comparison of Arthroscopy versus Open Arthrotomy for Treatment of Septic Arthritis of the Native Knee: Analysis of 90-Day Postoperative Complications

Septic arthritis is an orthopaedic emergency, often necessitating surgical debridement, and the knee joint is most frequently affected. Arthroscopic and open irrigation and debridement (I&D) are the two commonest surgical treatments for septic arthritis of the native knee. Several studies have compared outcomes of open and arthroscopic management without coming to a clear conclusion which yields superior outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of these two surgical techniques to treat septic arthritis of the native knee using a large nationwide database. Patients who underwent arthroscopic or open I&D as treatment for knee septic arthritis from 2010 to 2019 were identified using a national insurance database. The primary outcome was the 90-day reoperation rate. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infection, readmission, and other postoperative complications. A total of 1,139 patients were identified, 618 of whom (54%) underwent open treatment and 521 (46%) underwent arthroscopic treatment. The two groups did not differ significantly by age, gender, or most comorbidities. There was no significant difference in 90-day reoperation rate between the groups (15.0.% open and 18.0% arthroscopic, p = 0.174). Patients who underwent open treatment had increased odds of readmission to the hospital (odds ratio [OR] = 1.46 [1.14-1.86]; p = 0.003), postoperative anemia (OR = 1.71 [1.08-2.75]; p = 0.025), and blood transfusion (OR = 1.76 [1.04-3.06]; p = 0.040) compared with those who underwent arthroscopic surgery. Using administrative claims data, we found that arthroscopic and open I&D have similar rates of reoperation and most 90-day postoperative outcomes. Lower rates of readmission, postoperative anemia, and blood transfusion were found with arthroscopic I&D, suggesting that arthroscopy may be preferable to open treatment in the management of septic arthritis of the native knee in cases in which other case- and surgeon-specific factors do not otherwise dictate the best treatment modality.

Similar Efficacy of Arthroscopy and Arthrotomy in Infection Eradication in the Treatment of Septic Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aim: To compare the arthroscopy vs. arthrotomy for the treatment of native knee septic arthritis.

Methods: Electronic databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. Retrospective comparative studies comparing arthroscopy or arthrotomy for patients with septic arthritis of the native knee were eligible for this review. The primary outcome was recurrence of infection after first procedure. The secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, operative time, range of motion of the involved knee after surgery, overall complications and mortality rate,

Results: Thirteen trials were included in this study. There were a total of 2,162 septic arthritis knees treated with arthroscopic debridement and irrigation, and 1,889 septic arthritis knees treated with open debridement and irrigation. Arthroscopy and arthrotomy management of the knee septic arthritis showed comparable rate of reinfection (OR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.57–1.27; P = 0.44). No significant difference was observed in hospital length of stay, operative time and mortality rate between arthroscopy and arthrotomy management group, while arthroscopy treatment was associated with significantly higher knee range of motion and lower complication rate when compared with arthrotomy treatment.

Conclusion: Arthroscopy and arthrotomy showed similar efficacy in infection eradication in the treatment of native septic knee. However, arthroscopy treatment was associated with better postoperative functional recovery and lower complication rate.

Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: clinical and radiological results

INTRODUCTION

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has an infection rate of 0.1-0.8%. Despite the wide amount of literature about septic total knee arthroplasty management, few data are available for UKA infection treatment. The aim is to present the clinical and radiological outcomes along with complication rates of a series of septic UKA treated with two-stage exchange.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 16 patient treated with staged UKA revision for infection between June 2015 and September 2019 in a single bone infection unit. The main demographic and surgical data were recorded. Clinical scores (VAS, KSS, OKS, postoperative ROM), radiological parameters (osseointegration, loosening and radiolucencies) and complications were reported. The mean follow-up was 33.5 ± 6.9 months.

RESULTS

Mean age at surgery was 68.5 ± 9.1. All but two were medial UKA. The mean number of previous surgeries was 2.9 ± 1.9. The mean ROM, VAS, KSS and OKS of the entire population improved significantly (p < 0.01). Radiological analysis did not show any migration or implant loosening. Ten constrained condylar and six posterior stabilized prosthesis were finally implanted. One intraoperative pathogen isolation was recorded and managed with suppressive therapy and good final outcome. The implant survivorship free from infection was 100% at the final follow-up. The overall survival rate for any reason of revision was 100% CONCLUSION: According to our results, staged revision represents a reliable ad effective option in delayed and late UKA infections. This technique provides optimal clinical and radiological results with acceptable complication rates. To the best of our knowledge, this represent the widest case series on infected UKA managed with two-stage exchange.

[Options and limits of arthroscopic treatment of joint empyema]

Due to its low invasive nature, arthroscopy nowadays represents the gold standard in the treatment of native joint empyema. This article gives a summary of the literature with expert recommendations, reviews and case reports on arthroscopic treatment of native joint empyema and the limitations. Most cases of native joint empyema can be successfully cleansed with arthroscopic treatment alone including lavage and débridement. In advanced stages of infection open arthrotomy is often needed for final infection cleansing. In postoperative infections with enclosed foreign material, such as after cruciate ligament reconstruction, the foreign material can in most cases be left in and successful infection eradication can be carried out with several arthroscopic lavages and débridement. In cases of higher grade infections with destruction of the joint, arthroscopic treatment alone is normally insufficient.

[Management of joint empyema]

Joint empyema, also known as septic arthritis, is a severe disease associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Failing to initiate immediate treatment can result in irreversible joint destruction within a short time. The knee joint is most frequently involved, followed by the shoulder and hip joints. Small joints are rarely affected. Typical risk factors include immunosuppression, renal insufficiency, diabetes mellitus and previous joint interventions. An early targeted diagnostic work-up and initiation of therapeutic steps is crucial to avoid irreversible joint destruction. Joint aspiration for diagnostic purposes is essential and should be performed immediately when a septic arthritis is suspected. An important differential diagnosis is metabolic arthritis (gout and chondrocalcinosis), which typically presents in a similar way. A differentiation from septic arthritis is important as metabolic arthritis requires a completely different treatment. After confirming the diagnosis, treatment consisting of a surgical procedure combined with antibiotics is initiated. In most cases an arthroscopic intervention is sufficient. In severe cases the arthroscopy needs to be repeated. An arthrotomy must be carried out only rarely. A pre-emptive antibiotic treatment is initially administered and is later adjusted according to the resistogram. This article gives an overview on the pathophysiology, diagnostics and general management of joint empyema.

Current surgical practice for septic arthritis of the knee in the United States

For septic arthritis of the knee, we attempted to determine: the preferred surgical technique in the United-States (US), the believed "gold-standard" treatment among others. This was performed by an electronic-survey distributed to all academic orthopaedic faculty throughout the US. The preferred method was arthroscopy (69.8%). Arthroscopy is believed to be the gold-standard in 27.0%, arthrotomy in 29.4%, while 43.5% believe no gold-standard exists. In conclusion the majority of surgeons prefer arthroscopy when managing a native, septic knee in an adult patient. However, there is no national consensus on a gold-standard treatment or the role of synovectomy.

Comparison of open arthrotomy versus arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of septic arthritis in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of arthrotomy, when compared with arthroscopy, in the treatment of adults with septic arthritis of any joint.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched to identify studies comparing arthrotomy and arthroscopy as therapeutic approaches in patients with septic arthritis of any joint. The main outcome was the re-infection rate. A meta-analysis was performed using the generic inverse variance method with random or fixed effects model depending on heterogeneity between studies. Heterogeneity was tested with the I² statistic index.

RESULTS

Twenty studies with 10,249 patients treated by arthrotomy or arthroscopy were evaluated. We observed a significant lower risk of re-infection (odds ratio [OR], 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16-1.58]; p = 0.0002) and complications (OR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.12-1.55]; p = 0.001) rate as well as less hospital stay (mean difference [MD], 0.57 days [95% CI, 0.10-1.05]; p = 0.02) favouring arthroscopic intervention. The subanalysis indicated that patients with knee (OR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.17-1.92]; p = 0.001) and shoulder (OR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.00-1.53]; p = 0.04) septic arthritis intervened by arthrotomy had a higher risk of re-infection. A lower number of hospitalization days (MD, 0.89 days [95% CI, 0.31-1.47]; p = 0.003) and a lower risk for complications (OR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.04-1.52]; p = 0.02) were observed in patients treated with arthroscopy after septic knee arthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that patients with septic arthritis of the knee and shoulder treated by arthroscopy have less risk of re-infection than those treated by arthrotomy. The quality of the body of evidence is still insufficient to reach reliable conclusions.

PROSPERO TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020176044. Date registration: April 28, 2020.

Bacterial Septic Arthritis of the Adult Native Knee Joint: A Review

» Acute bacterial septic arthritis of the knee is an orthopaedic emergency and, if left untreated, can result in substantial joint degradation. » Important risk factors for development of septic arthritis include age of >60 years, recent bacteremia, diabetes, cancer, cirrhosis, renal disease, drug or alcohol abuse, a history of corticosteroid injection, a recent injury or surgical procedure, a prosthetic joint, and a history of rheumatoid arthritis. » The diagnosis is primarily based on history and clinical presentation of a red, warm, swollen, and painful joint with limited range of motion. Laboratory values and inflammatory markers from serum and joint fluid may serve as adjuncts when there is clinical suspicion of septic arthritis. » The initial and general antibiotic regimen should cover methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and gram-negative and gram-positive organisms. The antibiotic regimen should be specified following the culture results of the infected joint. » Operative management involves either arthrotomy or arthroscopy of the knee with thorough irrigation and debridement of all infected tissue. The Gächter classification is useful in establishing a prognosis or in determining the need for an extensive debridement.

In-Hospital Complications following Arthrotomy versus Arthroscopy for Septic Knee Arthritis: A Cohort-Matched Comparison

There is a paucity of literature comparing the relative merits of open arthrotomy versus arthroscopy for the surgical treatment of septic knee arthritis. The primary goal of this study is to compare the risk of perioperative complications between these two surgical techniques. To this end, 560 patients treated for septic arthritis of the native knee with arthroscopy were statistically matched 1:1 with 560 patients treated with open arthrotomy. The outcome measures included major complications, minor complications, mortality, inpatient hospital charges, and length of stay (LOS). Major complications were defined as myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, stroke, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, postoperative shock, unplanned ventilation, deep surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, infected postoperative seroma, hospital acquired urinary tract infection, and retained surgical item. Minor complications included phlebitis and thrombophlebitis, postprocedural emphysema, minor surgical site infection, peripheral nerve complication, and intraoperative hemorrhage. Mortality data were extracted from the database using the Uniform Bill patient disposition. Complications were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models, whereas mean costs and LOS were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis H-test. Major complications occurred in 3.8% of the patients in the arthroscopy cohort and 5.4% of the patients in the arthrotomy cohort (p = 0.20). Too few patients in our sample died to report based on National (Nationwide) Impatient Sample (NIS) minimum reporting standards. Rates of minor complications were similar for the arthroscopy and arthrotomy cohorts (12.5 vs. 13.9%; p = 0.48). Multivariate analysis did not reveal any greater risk of minor or major complication between the two procedures. Inpatient hospital cost was similar for arthroscopy (  = $15,917; standard deviation [SD] = 14,424) and arthrotomy (  = $16,020; SD = 18,665; p = 0.42). LOS was also similar for both arthrotomy (6.78 days, SD = 6.75) and arthroscopy (6.24 days, SD = 5.95; p = 0.23). Patients undergoing arthroscopic treatment of septic arthritis of the knee showed no difference in relative risk of perioperative complications, LOS, or hospital cost compared with patients who underwent open arthrotomy.

Treatment and Outcome of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a devastating but poorly understood complication, with a paucity of published data regarding treatment and outcomes. This study analyzes the largest cohort of UKA PJIs to date comparing treatment outcome, septic and aseptic reoperation rates, and risk factors for treatment failure.

METHODS

Twenty-one UKAs in 21 patients treated for PJI, as defined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria, were retrospectively reviewed. Minimum and mean follow-up was 1 and 3.5 years, respectively. Fourteen (67%) patients had acute postoperative PJIs. Surgical treatment included 16 debridement, antibiotics, and implant retentions (DAIRs) (76%), 4 two-stage revisions (19%), and 1 one-stage revision (5%). Twenty (95%) PJIs were culture positive with Staphylococcus species identified in 15 cases (71%).

RESULTS

Survivorship free from reoperation for infection at 1 year was 76% (95% confidence interval, 58%-93%). Overall survival from all-cause reoperation was 57% (95% confidence interval, 27%-87%) at 5 years. Two additional patients (10%) underwent aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty for lateral compartment degeneration 1 year after DAIR and tibial aseptic loosening 2.5 years after 2-stage revision. All patients who initially failed PJI UKA treatment presented with acute postoperative PJIs (5 of 14; 36%).

CONCLUSION

Survivorship free from persistent PJI at 1 year is low at 76% but is consistent with similar reports of DAIRs for total knee arthroplasties. Furthermore, there is low survivorship free from all-cause reoperation of 71% and 57% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Surgeons should be aware of these poorer outcomes and consider treating UKA PJI early and aggressively.

Arthrotomy debridement of arthrostic septic arthritis of the knee is more effective than arthroscopic debridement and delays the need for prosthesis despite progression

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

40%-50% of this septic arthritis occurs in the knee, despite rapid medical surgical treatment, 24%-50% will have a poor clinical outcome. It is not clear which debridement technique, by arthrotomy or arthroscopy, is more effective in controlling infection, or whether or not previous osteoarthritis worsens the outcome. The objective of this study on septic arthritis of the osteoarthritic knee was to analyse which surgical debridement technique, arthroscopy or arthrotomy, is more effective, the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the patients, and how many go on to require a TKR after the infection has healed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in 27 patients with native septic arthritis of the knee. Eighteen were men and the mean age was 64.8 years (30-89years). Fifteen patients were debrided by arthrotomy and 12 by arthroscopy. The effectiveness of debridement in controlling infection, the radiographic progression of the osteoarthritis on the Ahlbäch scale, the need for subsequent replacement, and pain and functional status were analysed using the VAS and WOMAC scales at 52.8±11.2-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The infection was controlled in 93% and 92% of the patients, 13% and 42% required 2 or more surgeries for infection control, 18% and 44.4% showed progression of arthritis in the arthrotomy and arthroscopy groups, respectively. One patient in each group required a knee replacement. The VAS score was superior in the arthrotomy group and there were no differences in WOMAC score.

CONCLUSION

Debridement by arthrotomy in the emergency department by non-sub-specialist knee surgeons is more effective than arthroscopic debridement in controlling septic arthritis of the knee. Surgical debridement of septic arthritis in knees with previous osteoarthritis enabled control of the infection with no pain despite the progression of the osteoarthritis.

Repeat irrigation & debridement for patients with acute septic knee arthritis: Incidence and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Septic knee arthritis is considered an orthopedic emergency due to its significant morbidity and potential to be life-threatening. One important outcome in treatment of septic knee arthritis is whether return to the operating room for repeat irrigation and debridement is required. This complication presents extra burden to the patient, as well as to the health care system. This study aims to first isolate the incidence of repeat irrigation and debridement at the authors' home institution and then define risk factors for repeat washout for septic arthritis of the knee.

METHODS

Records from all patients at a single academic institution with acute septic knee arthritis who had arthroscopic or open I&D of the knee joint from January 2005-December 2015 were collected retrospectively. Patients were initially identified on the basis of diagnosis coding in the institution's medical information system. Following collection/screening based on strict inclusion/exclusion criteria, a cohort of 63 patients was ultimately included. 18 patients were assigned to a "repeat washout" (RW) cohort and 45 patients were assigned to a "no repeat washout" (NRW) cohort. Univariate analyses and multivariable regression models were performed between the two washout cohorts to identify variables associated with repeat washout.

RESULTS

Patients requiring a repeat washout (RW) had a statistically significant association with African American/Hispanic race, higher BUN levels, higher serum white blood cell (WBC) count on admission, concurrent infection, and isolated bacteremia when compared to those patients who did not require a repeat washout (NRW) (all respective P < 0.05). Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated concurrent infection and higher synovium WBC count to increase the risk for another repeat washout. Patients who had a concurrent infection were shown to have nearly 12-fold higher odds of needing a repeat washout than those without a concurrent infection (95% CI:2.40-56.88; P = 0.0023). For every 1000 unit increase in synovium WBC count, the odds of needing a repeat washout increased by 1% in patients with concurrent infection (95% CI:1-2%; P = 0.0168).

CONCLUSION

This study retrospectively isolated risk factors associated with repeat surgical lavage. In the multivariable regression analysis, both concurrent infection and increased synovial WBC count were significantly associated with the need for repeat knee I&D. This finding is significant, as it may signify a potential for increased infectious resilience for acute septic arthritis of the knee secondary to seeding from systemic infection, thus requiring multiple I&Ds to meet resolution. This finding may carry clinical significance in the early stages of patient counseling regarding hospital course and prognosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Septic Arthritis of Native Shoulder and Knee Joint: What Are the Differences in Bacterial Spectrum, Treatment, and Outcome?

Background: Acute native septic arthritis is a joint-threatening emergency. To date, however, no gold-standard treatment nor joint-specific treatment algorithms exist. We aimed to evaluate the etiologies, bacterial spectrum, treatments, and surgical outcomes of septic arthritis of the shoulder and knee. Methods: Seventy-one patients with septic arthritis of either the knee (n = 42) or the shoulder (n = 29) were followed over a mean period of 40 months (26-65). Data were collected according to the performed surgical procedure and pathway as well as the cause of infection, bacterial spectrum, and the Gächter classification. The prospective clinical examination included the Knee Society Score (KSS) or Constant Score (CS; shoulder group), pre- and post-operative pain, and return to previous activity. Results: Septic arthritis was caused primarily by post-interventional or post-traumatic conditions in the knee group and by hematogenous infection in the shoulder group. Staphylococcus aureus and S. epidermidis were most common, whereas Propionibacerium. were seen only in shoulder infections. Remission rates were 95% in the knee versus 90% in the shoulder group, whereas the mortality rate in the shoulder group was 10% (no one died in the knee group). While most knee infections could be managed with an arthroscopic approach, all shoulder infections necessitated an open approach. The mean KSS was 87.3 (49-100); the mean CS was 66.6 (37-95). Fifty percent of patients in the shoulder group versus 71% in the knee group reached their previous level of activity. Conclusion: The knee group exhibited post-interventional etiology, in line with high-virulence microbes and a high success rate with arthroscopic restoration. Septic shoulder arthritis showed hematogenous scattering, low-virulent microbes, and multiple interventions with a final open approach was always required. In contrast to the knee, in septic arthritis of the shoulder, a significant reduction in function has to be expected.

Treatment of acute shoulder infection: can osseous lesion be a rudder in guideline for determining the method of débridement?

BACKGROUND

There is no standard to determine the most appropriate method of operation for the treatment of acute septic arthritis of the shoulder joint.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 57 patients who underwent arthroscopic or open débridement for acute shoulder infection between 2001 and 2015. Arthroscopic débridement was performed in 27 patients, and open débridement in 30 patients. According to the presence of bone erosion and/or marginal erosion of cartilage of the humeral head on plain radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images, the cases were classified into 3 groups (group 1, n = 23, without erosions in x-ray and MRI; group 2, n = 21, erosions seen in MRI but not in x-ray; and group 3, n = 13, with erosions seen in both x-ray and MRI).

RESULTS

The arthroscopic group had a reinfection rate of 55.6% (15/27), and the open group had a reinfection rate of 16.7% (5/30). The reinfection rates in the arthroscopic and the open groups were 10% (1/10) and 15.4% (2/13) in group 1; 75% (9/12) and 11.1% (1/9) in group 2; and 100% (5/5) and 25% (2/8) in group 3, respectively. At the last follow-up, the mean University of California at Los Angeles score and the average time until normalization of white blood cell, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein in the open group showed superior results in the open group (all P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

When preoperative MRI showed bone and/or cartilage erosion of humeral head, the reinfection rate after arthroscopic débridement was above 75%. Therefore, if preoperative MRI showed erosions, open débridement is more likely to be appropriate than arthroscopic débridement.

Arthroscopy versus arthrotomy for the treatment of septic knee arthritis

Purpose

To compare complications following arthroscopy and arthrotomy for treatment of septic knee arthritis.

Methods

Patients undergoing arthroscopy and arthrotomy for a diagnosis of septic knee arthritis were identified in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and placed in a multivariate analysis to determine if type of surgery contributed to postoperative complications.

Results

Knee arthrotomy was associated with an increased risk for increased operative time [Parameter estimate 4.555 (95% CI:3.023-6.085); p < 0.0001], minor morbid events [OR 2.064 (95% CI: 1.447-2.943); p < 0.0001], and any morbidity [OR 2.285 (95% CI:1.527-3.419); p < 0.0001].

Conclusions

Knee arthrotomy was associated with a higher risk of complications.

Similar 30-Day Complications for Septic Knee Arthritis Treated With Arthrotomy or Arthroscopy: An American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of the current study was to use the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) to determine whether there were differences in 30-day perioperative complications between open arthrotomy and arthroscopy for the treatment of septic knees in a large national sample.

METHODS

Patients who were diagnosed with a septic knee and underwent open arthrotomy or arthroscopy were identified in the 2005-2014 NSQIP data sets. Patient demographics and perioperative complications were characterized and compared between the 2 procedures.

RESULTS

In total, 168 patients undergoing knee arthrotomy and 216 patients undergoing knee arthroscopy for septic knee were identified. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic variables between the 2 groups. On univariate analysis, the rate of minor adverse events (MAEs; 15.48% vs 8.80%, P = .043) was higher in the open arthrotomy treatment group, while the rate of serious adverse events (SAEs; 37.50% vs 26.19%, P = .019) was higher in the arthroscopic surgery treatment group. On multivariate analysis, which controlled for patient characteristics/comorbidities and used the Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, there were no statistically significant differences in risk of any adverse events (relative risk [RR] = 0.851; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.598-1.211; P = .240), MAE (RR = 1.653; 99% CI, 0.818-3.341; P = .066), SAE (RR = 0.706; 99% CI, 0.471-1.058; P = .027), return to the operating room (RR = 0.810; 99% CI, 0.433-1.516; P = .387), or readmission (RR = 1.022; 99% CI, 0.456-2.294; P = .944) between open compared with arthroscopic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Univariate analysis revealed a lower rate of MAE but a higher rate of SAE in the arthroscopic surgery treatment group. However, on multivariate analysis, similar perioperative complications, rate of return to the operating room, and rate of readmission were found after open and arthroscopic debridement for septic knees. Based on the lack of demonstrated superiority of either of these 2 treatment modalities for this given diagnosis, and the expectation that most differences in perioperative complications for this diagnosis would have declared themselves within the first 30 days, deciding between the studied treatment modalities may be based more on other factors not included in this study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective comparative study, Level III.

Surgical treatment of shoulder infections: a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy

BACKGROUND

Management of bacterial shoulder infections includes antibiotic therapy and surgical joint decompression. Arthroscopy and open arthrotomy are recommended treatment options. Whether 1 of the 2 surgical options is superior remains unclear. The present study aimed (1) to compare the reinfection rates after arthroscopy and open arthrotomy and (2) to identify risk factors of reinfection after surgical intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of 59 consecutive patients were available for final analysis. All patients received arthroscopy or open arthrotomy at our institution between 2001 and 2015. The reinfection rates between the 2 distinct interventions were compared. We also evaluated the influence of potential confounders, such as age, sex, comorbidities, microbiological findings, duration of symptoms, osteoarthritis, Gächter score, and preoperative inflammatory parameters, on the recurrence of infections and compared the functional outcome between the 2 surgery groups.

RESULTS

From 59 included patients, 38 (64.4%) underwent open arthrotomy, and 21 (35.6%) were treated arthroscopically. Reinfection was documented in 18 patients (30.5%). The reinfection rate was significantly higher in arthroscopically treated patients (11 [52.4%]) than in patients who underwent open arthrotomy (7 [18.4%]; P = .007). An infection with Staphylococcus aureus negatively influenced the treatment success (P = .034).

CONCLUSION

According to our data, open arthrotomy is the more effective treatment method in septic arthritis of the shoulder, with lower reinfection rates and a comparable functional outcome. Furthermore, we could identify Staphylococcus aureus as an independent risk factor for the recurrence of infections.

Complete Arthroscopic Synovectomy in Management of Recalcitrant Septic Arthritis of the Knee Joint

Septic arthritis of the knee is a potentially life-threatening condition and can be associated with many late complications. The key of success of management of septic arthritis of the knee joint is early aggressive treatment of surgical debridement and decompression and antibiotic therapy. In adults, arthroscopic drainage with synovectomy is the treatment of choice in septic arthritis of the knee, with lower rates of infectious recurrence than needle aspiration and better functional results than open surgery. Repeated arthroscopic debridement and drainage is needed in case of delayed treatment with an advanced arthroscopic stage of the infection, early unfavorable course, or multiresistant germ. In these situations, synovectomy should be as complete as possible to maximize the reduction of the bacterial burden and avoid the need of further debridement. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe the details of complete arthroscopic synovectomy of the knee joint. This includes 2 circles of circumferential synovectomy. One circle is in the axial plane and includes the intercondylar notch, anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral compartments. The other circle is in the coronal plane and includes the supra-patellar pouch, medial and lateral recesses, and the anterior compartment.

Arthrotomy versus arthroscopy in the treatment of septic arthritis of the knee in adults: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of treatment and functional recovery of patients diagnosed with septic arthritis of the knee submitted to two surgical techniques: conventional arthrotomy and arthroscopic approach for debridement.

METHOD

In this prospective clinical study, all adult patients diagnosed with knee pyoarthritis in a 15-month period at a philanthropic hospital in Brazil were randomized into two groups: one group submitted to arthrotomy and the other to arthroscopy. The protocols of antibiotic therapy, physical therapy and postoperative assessment were standardized in both groups. Demographic, clinical, functional and laboratorial variables were compared between groups, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months.

RESULTS

There was no difference in effectiveness of treatment in both groups, but 2 patients (18.2 %) of the arthrotomy group needed a new approach. The pain was higher in those undergoing treatment by arthrotomy, at 7 and 14 days postoperatively. The return to activities of daily living took an average of 5.7 days for both groups: 7.1 days for the arthrotomy group and 4.3 days for arthroscopy group.

CONCLUSION

It was found that the treatment of knee septic arthritis by both techniques showed similar effectiveness in healing, but the arthroscopy procedure was better than arthrotomy because it has a lower reinfection rate and low initial inflammatory reaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic studies, Level I.