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.)

Aims: The treatment of septic arthritis of the shoulder is challenging. The infection frequently recurs and the clinical outcome can be very poor. We aimed to review the outcomes following the use of continuous negative pressure after open debridement with a large diameter drain in patients with septic arthritis of the shoulder., Patients and Methods: A total of 68 consecutive patients with septic arthritis of the shoulder underwent arthrotomy, irrigation and debridement. A small diameter suction drain was placed in the glenohumeral joint and a large diameter drain was placed in the subacromial space with continuous negative pressure of 15 cm H2O. All patients received a standardised protocol of antibiotics for a mean of 5.1 weeks (two to 11.1)., Results: Negative pressure was maintained for a mean of 24 days (14 to 32). A total of 67 patients (98.5%) were cured without further treatment being required. At a mean follow-up of 14 months (three to 72), the mean forward flexion was 123° (80° to 140°) and the mean external rotation was 28°(10° to 40°) in those with a rotator cuff tear, and 125° (85° to 145°) and 35° (15° to 45°) in those without a rotator cuff tear., Conclusion: Continuous negative pressure, following open arthrotomy, irrigation and debridement, was effective in treating septic arthritis of the shoulder. The rate of recurrence was significantly lower than with conventional treatment involving arthroscopic or open debridement reported in the literature. Functional outcomes, even in patients with rotator cuff tears, were excellent., Take Home Message: Continuous negative pressure is effective in treating septic arthritis of the shoulder. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:660-5., (©2016 The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.)

Background: Open debridement remains the gold standard for the clinical treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness. However, postoperative complications, such as re-contraction and heterotopic ossification of the elbow joint, are highly prevalent. Hinged external fixation appears to offer the potential for greater improvement of joint function and reduction of complications. The purpose of this article is to provide the latest evidence on the effectiveness and safety of hinged external fixation combined with open debridement for the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness. Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until December 31, 2022. STATA 15.1 software was used to analyze all the data for this article. The quality of the included articles was evaluated using the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook 5.3. Results: Finally, we selected 8 high-quality RCTs for our meta-analysis, which included 555 patients. The meta-analysis demonstrated that hinged external fixation combined with open debridement for post-traumatic elbow stiffness (treatment group) showed a significant increase in elbow flexion and extension mobility (WMD = 5.16, 95% CI 4.39–5.49, Z = 13.02, P = 0.000), Mayo elbow function scores (WMD = 5.25, 95% CI 4.33–6.17, Z = 11.15, P = 0.000), and Mayo excellent rate (RR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.14–1.37, Z = 4.87, P = 0.000). Additionally, there was a significant decrease in the complication rate (RR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.02–1.20, Z = 2.54, P = 0.011) compared to open debridement alone (control group). Furthermore, the results of the publication bias test showed no significant bias. Conclusions: With the assistance of hinged external fixation, open debridement for post-traumatic elbow stiffness can lead to increased elbow mobility and a reduced complication rate. However, due to the small sample size, a multicenter randomized controlled trial with a larger sample size is still necessary to further confirm the effectiveness and safety of hinged external fixation combined with open debridement for post-traumatic elbow stiffness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In acute periprosthetic knee infections, debridement and implant retention (DAIR) is the preferred treatment prior to one- and two-stage revisions. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of arthroscopic and open debridement of infected primary total knee arthroplasties (TKA). Material and methods: We analyzed clinical, laboratory, and antibiotic treatment data, collected in patients with periprosthetic knee infection treated with DAIR at a Swiss Level 1 orthopedic and trauma center over a 10-year period between January 2005 and May 2015. Inclusion criteria were primary total knee arthroplasty and early postoperative or acute hematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The primary endpoint was the need for further revision surgery due to persistent infection. The secondary endpoint was the prosthesis salvage in further infection surgeries. Results: Forty-two patients with 44 acute or hematogenous periprosthetic knee infections were included. We recorded 20 recurrent infections (45%) in our study population: 10 (77%) out of 13 in the arthroscopic DAIR group and 10 (32%) out of 31 in the open DAIR group. Two-stage revision, meaning complete removal of the TKA, insertion of a spacer and replantation at a second stage, had to be performed in three patients treated initially arthroscopically (23%) and in six patients treated initially with an open surgical procedure (21%). Conclusions: Open debridement for acute periprosthetic knee infection shows clear benefits in terms of infection eradication and prosthesis salvage compared to arthroscopic DAIR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Open debridement (OD) of the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon, both with and without repair to the lateral epicondyle, are effective treatments for recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis. However, few comparative studies exist within the literature. Purpose: To (1) compare the 5-year reoperation rates of patients who underwent OD alone versus OD with tendon repair (ODR) and (2) identify the 90-day adverse event rates, total same-day reimbursement amounts, and national usage trends for these 2 procedures from 2010 to 2019. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The PearlDiver MUExtr database was reviewed for patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis who underwent OD alone and ODR or reattachment between January 2010 and December 2019. These patients were stratified into 2 cohorts: the OD cohort and ODR cohort. The 5-year reoperation rates were assessed and compared, and the incidence of 90-day postoperative complications and risk factors were identified. The number of ODs and ODRs performed each year and the mean same-day reimbursement amounts (in US$) for both procedures were assessed. Results: Overall, 41,932 lateral epicondylitis patients who underwent debridement were identified, with 17,139 OD patients and 24,793 ODR patients. There were no significant changes in the proportion of OD versus ODR procedures performed during the study period (P =.18). A significantly higher incidence of hematoma was seen after OD compared with ODR (0.19% vs 0.12%; P =.04), but ODR had a significantly lower 5-year reoperation rate than OD (2.8% vs 3.9%; P =.006), with an absolute risk reduction of 1.1% and a number needed to treat of 91. Finally, ODR ($1683.17 ± $12.15) had a higher mean same-day reimbursement than OD ($1479.05 ± $15.78) (P =.001). Conclusion: Both OD and ODR had low complication rates. The 5-year reoperation rates were low for both procedures, but they were significantly higher for OD. Over the 10-year study period, there were no significant changes in the relative percentages of OD versus ODR performed. ODR had a significantly higher mean same-day reimbursement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]