Search

Background: Although 2-stage exchange arthroplasty, consisting of temporary insertion of an antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer (AICS), is considered the standard of care for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), a consensus on the AICS design has not yet been established. Ceramic-on-polyethylene AICSs (Poly-AICS) are theorized to cause less pain and better function than cement-on-bone AICS (CemB-AICS) but use non-antibiotic-impregnated components that may harbor bacteria. This study evaluates the impact of spacer design on infection-free survivorship following THA reimplantation as well as pain and function during the interim AICS stage. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of all cases of THA PJI treated with either Poly-AICS or CemB-AICS at a single high-volume academic center. Data were collected until the final follow-up after THA reimplantation with an average follow-up duration of 2.6 years. The primary outcome was infection-free survivorship after the final reimplantation. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, opioid use, time to ambulation, length of stay, complications, and discharge disposition. Results: A total of 99 cases (67 CemB-AICS; 32 Poly-AICS) were included. There were no baseline differences between the 2 groups. There were no differences in infection-free survivorship after reimplantation in survivorship curve comparisons (P = .122) and no differences in postoperative inpatient pain scores, opioid use, length of stay, time to ambulation, complications, or discharge disposition during the AICS stage. Conclusions: Patients with THA PJI treated with Poly-AICS did not have worse infection-related outcomes despite the use of non-antibiotic-impregnated components but also did not appear to have less pain or improved function during the early AICS stage.

Background: Serum cluster of differentiation 64 (CD64) has emerged as a diagnostic test for musculoskeletal infections. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of serum CD64 in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) compared to conventional markers like white blood count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and interleukin-6 (IL-6). Methods: A prospective case-control study on patients undergoing revision hip or knee arthroplasty surgery >6 weeks after their index surgery was performed at a single institution. Whole blood samples were drawn within 24 hours prior to revision surgery for white blood count, ESR, CRP, IL-6, and CD64. Intraoperative cultures were obtained during the revision, and PJI was defined using the major criteria from the 2018 Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Fisher’s exact test were used to determine if there were significant differences in serum laboratory values between patients with and without infection. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, and accuracy of each test were calculated. Results: With an average age of 67 years, 39 patients with 15 revision THAs and 24 TKAs, were included. 19 patients (48.7%) were determined to have PJI. Patients with PJI had significantly higher CD64 (P = .036), CRP (P = .016), and ESR (P = .045). CD64 had the highest specificity (100%) and PPV (100%), moderate accuracy (69.2%), but low sensitivity (37.0%) and negative predictive value (62.5%). Conclusions: Given the high specificity, PPV, and accuracy, CD64 may be an excellent confirmatory test to help diagnose PJI.

Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is a rare but potentially fatal complication that can occur during hip arthroscopy. This usually occurs as a result of arthroscopic fluid passing into the retroperitoneal space through the psoas tunnel. From the retroperitoneal space, the fluid can then enter the intraperitoneal space through defects in the peritoneum. Previous studies have identified female sex, iliopsoas tenotomy, pump pressure, and operative time as potential risk factors for fluid extravasation. We present a method to measure intraoperative fluid deficit during hip arthroscopy to alert surgeons to possible ACS. Our proposed technique requires diligent intraoperative monitoring of fluid output through various suction devices, including suction canisters, puddle vacuums, and suction mats. The difference is then calculated from the fluid intake from the arthroscopic fluid bags. If the difference is greater than 1500 mL, then the anesthesiologist and circulating nurse are instructed to examine the abdomen for distension every 15 minutes. This, combined with other common symptoms such as hypotension and hypothermia, should alert the surgical team to the development of ACS. Despite limitations to this technique, this approach offers an objective method to calculate intra-abdominal fluid extravasation.