Local antibiotics in primary hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Infection is a truly devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty, causing most patients to undergo a revision surgery, and to bear significant psychological and financial burden. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate the literature to determine the efficacy and complication profile of local antibiotic application in primary total joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

All studies of primary total joint arthroplasty which assessed local antibiotics in any form other than antibiotic-impregnated cement as an intervention were included. Studies that reported at least one outcome related to infection and were available in full text in English were eligible for inclusion. Studies which included both primary and revision cases but did not report the stratified data for each type of surgery and studies on fracture populations were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 9 studies involving 3,714 cases were included. The pooled deep infection rate was 1.6% in the intervention groups and 3.5% in the control groups. Meta-analysis revealed a RR of 0.53 (95%CI: 0.35-0.79, p = 0.002) with no heterogeneity (I² = 0%) for infection in the intervention groups. Meta-analysis revealed a non-significant reduction in superficial infection rates in the intervention groups; however, there was a significant increase in aseptic wound complications in the intervention groups.

CONCLUSION

Local antibiotic application results in a moderate reduction in deep infection rates in primary total joint arthroplasty, with no significant impact on superficial infection rates. However, local antibiotic application may be associated with a moderate increase in aseptic wound complications.

Use of dual mobility components in total hip arthroplasty: Indications and outcomes

Instability after total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be a problematic complication and remains one of the leading causes of revision surgery in the early post-operative period. Dual mobility (DM) implants decrease dislocation risk after THA but they come with their own set of complications. Selective use of DM implants for THA in high risk groups can confer the advantages of this construct while mitigating the risks. In this paper, we review the current literature to examine the evidence for or against use of DM implants in various clinical scenarios and provide an algorithm for when to consider using DM design construct in THA.

The Rim Cutter does not show an advantage over modern cementing techniques: a five-year radiological and clinical follow-up of the Rim Cutter used with flanged acetabular components

AIMS

We report the incidence of radiolucent lines (RLLs) using two flanged acetabular components at total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the effect of the Rim Cutter.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 300 hips in 292 patients who underwent primary cemented THA. A contemporary flanged acetabular component was used with (group 1) and without (group 2) the use of the Rim Cutter and the Rimfit acetabular component was used with the Rim Cutter (group 3). RLLs and clinical outcomes were evaluated immediately post-operatively and at five years post-operatively.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the incidence of RLLs on the immediate post-operative radiographs (p = 0.241) or at five years post-operatively (p = 0.463). RLLs were seen on the immediate post-operative radiograph in 2% of hips in group 1, in 5% in group 2 and in 7% in group 3. Five years post-operatively, there were RLLs in 42% of hips in group 1, 41% in group 2 and in 49% in group 3. In the vast majority of hips, in each group, the RLL was present in DeLee and Charnley zone 1 only (86%, 83%, 67% respectively). Oxford and Harris Hip scores improved significantly in all groups. There was no significant difference in these scores or in the change in scores between the groups, with follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Despite the Rim Cutter showing promising results in early laboratory and clinical studies, this analysis of the radiological and clinical outcome five years post-operatively does not show any advantage over and above modern cementing techniques in combination with a well performing cemented acetabular component. For this reason, we no longer use the Rim Cutter in routine primary THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1450-7.