Search

Objective To compare the surgical outcomes of debridement, antibiotics, and single‐stage total hip replacement (DASR) vs two‐stage arthroplasty (two‐stage arthroplasty) for chronic destructive septic hip arthritis (SHA). Methods Cases of chronic destructive SHA treated by DASR or two‐stage arthroplasty in our department from January 2008 to October 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographic information, perioperative inflammation markers, intraoperative blood loss, microbial culture, and metagenomic new generation sequencing results were recorded. The perioperative complications, hospital stay, hospitalization cost, infection recurrence rate, and Harris Hip Score (HHS) at the last follow‐up were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 28 patients were included in the study, including 11 patients who received DASR and 17 patients who received two‐stage arthroplasty. There was no significant difference in demographic information, preoperative serum inflammatory markers, synovial fluid white blood cell count, or percentage of polymorphonuclear leukocytes between the two groups. The DASR group demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative blood loss [(368.2 ± 253.3) mL vs (638.2 ± 170.0) mL, p = 0.002], hospital stay [(22.6 ± 8.1) days vs (43.5 ± 13.2) days, p

The aim of this systematic review was to characterize the clinical features of adults with Salmonella osteomyelitis and summarize diagnosis and treatment methods to provide guidance for clinicians. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We conducted a literature search in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Article screening and data extraction were performed by two reviewers individually. All the included studies were independently evaluated by two reviewers using the Methodological Index for Non‐Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. A total of 67 articles published between 1970 and 2019 were selected, which include 69 patients with an average age of 47.5 years (range, 18–79).The majority of cases (47.76%) occurred in immunocompetent adults without common risk factors. Aspiration and biopsy cultures were all positive in Salmonella osteomyelitis patients who underwent aspiration or biopsy. All infections were monomicrobial, and a total of 12 different serotypes were identified. The three most commonly reported Salmonella serotypes were Salmonella typhi (19 cases), Salmonella typhimurium (12 cases), and Salmonella enteritidis (11 cases). Only 12 of the 67 cases in our data (17.91%) had diarrhea symptoms, and 44 of the 67 cases (65.67%) had fever symptoms. Fifty‐nine of the 67 cases (88.06%) had local inflammatory manifestations, such as erythema, swelling, and tenderness in the affected area. The commonly reported involved sites were the vertebrae, femur, and tibia. Antibiotic therapy alone was utilized in 30 cases, and 24 patients (80.00%) were eventually cured. In total, 75.68% of patients achieved satisfactory results after treatment with surgery and antibiotics. Third‐generation cephalosporins were most commonly utilized, and antibiotic treatment was administered for an average of 11.3 weeks (95% CI, 8.31–14.37 weeks). Salmonella osteomyelitis should be considered in patients without any common risk factors. Aspiration or biopsy can facilitate the identification of pathogens to guide antibiotic choice. Empirical therapy with a third‐generation cephalosporin is recommended until the susceptibility of the strain is determined.

Objective To evaluated the clinical outcomes of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) patients with destination joint spacer compared with that of two‐stage revision. Methods From January 2006 to December 2017, data of PJI patients who underwent implantation with antibiotic‐impregnated cement spacers in our center due to chronic PJI were collected retrospectively. The diagnosis of PJI was based on the American Society for Musculoskeletal Infection (MSIS) criteria for PJI. One of the following must be met for diagnosis of PJI: a sinus tract communicating with the prosthesis; a pathogenis isolated by culture from two separate tissue or fluid samples obtained from the affected prosthetic joint; four of the following six criteria exist: (i) elevated ESR and CRP; (ii) elevate dsynovial fluid white blood cell (WBC) count; (iii) elevated synovial fluid neutrophil percentage (PMN%); (iv) presence of purulence in the affected joint; (v) isolation of a microorganism in one periprosthetic tissue or fluid culture; (vi) more than five neutrophilsper high‐power fields in five high‐power fields observed from histological analysis of periprosthetic tissue at ×400 magnification. Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and laboratory test results were recorded. All patients were followed up regularly after surgery, the infection‐relief rates were recorded, Harris hip score (HHS) and knee society score (KSS) were used for functional evaluation, a Doppler ultrasonography of the lower limb veins was performed for complication evaluation. The infection‐relief rates and complications were compared between destination joint spacer group and two‐stage revision group. Results A total of 62 patients who were diagnosed with chronic PJI were enrolled, with an age of 65.13 ± 9.94 (39–88) years. There were 21 cases in the destination joint spacer group and 41 cases in the temporary spacer group, namely, two‐stage revision group (reimplantation of prosthesis after infection relief). The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in the destination joint spacer group was higher than that in the temporary spacer group, and this might be the primary reason for joint spacer retainment. As for infection‐relief rate, there were three cases of recurrent infection (14.29%) in the destination joint spacer group and four cases of recurrent infection (9.76%) in the two‐stage revision group, there were no significant differences with regard to infection‐relief rate. Moreover, there two patients who suffered from spacer fractures, three cases of dislocation, one case of a periarticular fracture, and three cases of deep venous thrombosis in destination joint spacer group, while there was only one case of periprosthetic hip joint fracture, one case of dislocation, and one patient suffered from deep venous thrombosis of the lower extremity in two‐stage revision. The incidence of complications in the destination joint spacer group was higher than that of two‐stage revision. Conclusions In summary, the present work showed that a destination joint spacer might be provided as a last resort for certain PJI patients due to similar infection‐relief rate compared with two‐stage revision.

Our systematic review compiled multiple studies and evaluated survivorship and clinical outcomes of cup‐cage construct usage in the management of massive acetabular bone defects. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Various combinations of “acetabular”, “pelvis”, “cup cage” and their corresponding synonyms were used to search relevant articles in the Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed databases. Basic information of the functional scores, implant revision rate, and complication rate were selected as outcomes for analysis. Finally, a total of 11 articles published between 1999 and 2019 were selected, which include 232 patients with an average age of 68.5 years (range, 30–90). The mean follow‐up period was 48.85 months (range, 1–140). Our study shows that the cup‐cage construct has a good clinical outcome with a low revision rate and a low complication rate. Improved clinical outcomes of cup‐cage constructs were seen with a revision rate of 8% and an all‐cause complication rate of 20%. The most commonly reported complication was dislocation, followed by aseptic loosening, infection, and nerve injuries. In summary, it is a promising method for managing large acetabular bone defects in total hip revision.

Objective To report on our clinical outcomes and on the experience of managing acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). Methods We performed a retrospective review of all patients who were diagnosed with acute PJI after primary hip or knee replacement surgeries and who were managed with DAIR in our prospective joint replacement registry from 2008 to 2019. The diagnosis of PJI was made according to the 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. The symptom onset duration, inflammatory marker levels (i.e. C‐reactive protein [CRP], erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR], white cell count [WBC], and synovial WBC count), functional scores including the Knee Society Score (KSS), the KSS functional score and the Harris Hip Score (HHS), bacteriology, and surgical outcomes of the patients were tracked and recorded. A paired sample of joint fluid and tissues was also sent for a metagenomic next‐generation sequencing (mNGS) test. A paired‐samples t‐test was used to compare the differences in the inflammatory markers and functional scores before and after surgery. Results A total of 24 patients with 7 infections after hip replacements and 17 infections after knee replacements were included. A total of 21 patients exhibited early postoperative infections, and 3 exhibited late acute hematogenous infections. During a mean follow‐up time of 29.2 ± 15.1 months, 22 patients were successfully treated, whereas 2 patients were unsuccessfully treated and required repeated DAIR. The overall success rate of DAIR was 91.7%. For staphylococcal infections, DAIR had a 100% success rate. Five patients who presented with symptoms between 4 and 8 weeks also achieved a 100% success rate. At the last follow‐up, the mean CRP level decreased from 52.6 ± 34.0 to 5.4 ± 3.5 (P