Intraarticular vancomycin decreased the risk of acute postoperative periprosthetic joint infection without increasing complication in primary total joint arthroplasty-a prospective study

[Translated article] Vancomycin powder in the prevention of infection in primary knee and hip arthroplasty: Case-control study with 1151 arthroplasties

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Vancomycin powder (VP) has been positively used in spinal surgery to reduce the rate of infections. Hardly any data have been published on hip and knee joint replacement surgery, and its usefulness is questioned. Our objective was to investigate the effectiveness of VP in reducing prosthetic infection and its possible complications.

METHODS

Primary hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasties were reviewed, performed by five surgeons in one hospital centre, between 2017 and 2018. One gram of VP was used on the implant prior to surgical closure based on the surgeon's preferences. With a 5-year follow-up in which the infection rate and local complications were analysed.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and fifty-one arthroplasties were performed, 748 were TKA and 403 were THA. Nine patients were diagnosed with prosthetic infection, of which five received VP and four did not (p=0.555). Likewise, another 15 patients suffered wound complications, of which 11 received VP and 4 did not (p=0.412). There were no differences, either, in the rest of the complications depending on the use or not of VP (p=0.101). Likewise, the number of patients who needed reintervention was similar (p=0.999). No systemic complications were detected due to the use of VP.

CONCLUSIONS

It has not been possible to demonstrate that the use of VP reduces the rates of prosthetic infection in the hip and knee, so we cannot recommend its use.

Vancomycin powder in the prevention of infection in primary knee and hip arthroplasty: Case-control study with 1151 arthroplasties

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Vancomycin powder (VP) has been positively used in spinal surgery to reduce the rate of infections. Hardly any data have been published on hip and knee joint replacement surgery, and its usefulness is questioned. Our objective was to investigate the effectiveness of VP in reducing prosthetic infection and its possible complications.

METHODS

Primary hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasties were reviewed, performed by five surgeons in one hospital center, between 2017 and 2018. 1g of VP was used on the implant prior to surgical closure based on the surgeon's preferences. With a 5-year follow-up in which the infection rate and local complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and fifty one arthroplasties were performed, 748 were TKA and 403 were THA. Nine patients were diagnosed with prosthetic infection, of which five received VP and four did not (P=.555). Likewise, another 15 patients suffered wound complications, of which 11 received VP and 4 did not (P=.412). There were no differences, either, in the rest of the complications depending on the use or not of VP (P=.101). Likewise, the number of patients who needed reintervention was similar (P=.999). No systemic complications were detected due to the use of VP.

CONCLUSIONS

It has not been possible to demonstrate that the use of VP reduces the rates of prosthetic infection in the hip and knee, so we cannot recommend its use.