Search

Hypothesis: This study aimed to determine whether there are significant differences in 30-day perioperative complications between arthroscopic and open débridement (irrigation and débridement [I&D]) for septic arthritis (SA) of the shoulder using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database., Methods: Patients undergoing arthroscopic or open I&D of the native shoulder from 2006-2016 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Those with a diagnosis of SA were included in the study. Patients with a concurrent diagnosis of osteomyelitis around shoulder (n = 25) or polyarthritis (n = 2) were excluded from the study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and complications were compared between the groups. Poisson regression, which controlled for age and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, was used to calculate the relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for minor adverse events, serious adverse events, total adverse events, and unplanned reoperations between the 2 treatment groups, with significance set at P < .0125 after Bonferroni correction., Results: Overall, 147 and 57 patients underwent arthroscopic and open I&D, respectively, for SA of the shoulder. Patients in the open I&D group were more likely to be smokers (P = .0213), whereas patients in the arthroscopy group had higher ASA scores (P = .0008). After controlling for age and ASA score, we found no significant differences in the risk of minor adverse events (P = .0995), serious adverse events (P = .2241), total adverse events (P = .1871), or unplanned reoperations (P = .3855)., Conclusion: Arthroscopic débridement appears to be a safe alternative to open débridement for SA of the native shoulder. The incidence and risk of 30-day perioperative complications are similar after arthroscopic and open I&D for SA of the shoulder., (Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)