Histopathological assessment of a two-stage reconstructive procedure of the infected Charcot foot

INTRODUCTION

Charcot neuropathic osteoarthropathy (CN) can be complicated by osteomyelitis (OM). Surgery is a standard procedure to treat OM including debridement and interposition of antibiotic-loaded cement (ABLC) spacer. The course of CN and OM was investigated on a histopathological level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Diabetic patients (n = 15) suffering from CN and midfoot OM underwent surgical debridement and interposition of ABLC was interposed. 6 weeks later, ABLC was removed and bone samples were taken again. Histopathological Charcot Score (HCS), Histopathological Osteomyelitis Evaluation Score (HOES) and microbiological assessment were used to evaluate osteomyelitic and neuroosteoarthropathic activity at both time points.

RESULTS

Interposition of ABLC leads to microbiological/histopathological eradication of OM in 73%/87% of patients. CN activity-measured by HCS-could be reduced from moderate to low activity by ABLC spacer and correlated with HOES.

CONCLUSIONS

CN activity could be reduced by surgery. It can be suggested that neuroosteoarthropathic activity measured by HCS is triggered by OM.

Quality of life, infection control, and complication rates using a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer during two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for most chronically infected and complex total hip arthroplasty infections. To improve patient outcome and reduce complication rates, we have developed a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer technique and present our short-term results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between November 2017 and November 2019, 27 patients (mean age 70 years) underwent two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip using the articulating spacer design described here. We retrospectively analyzed spacer-related complications as well as rates for complication, infection control, and implant survivorship after final reimplantation. Furthermore, we prospectively collected patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores prior to spacer implantation, with the spacer and after reimplantation of the new prosthesis.

RESULTS

An additional round of spacer exchange was performed in two patients (8.3%), persistent wound discharge was the reason in both cases. We had one (4.2%) spacer-related mechanical complication, a dislocation that was treated with closed reduction. After reimplantation, infection control was achieved in 96% with an implant survivorship of 92% after a mean follow-up time of 19 (range 7-32, SD 7.2) months. While the scores for VR-12 MCS, VAS hip pain and patient-reported overall satisfaction significantly improved after first stage surgery, the scores for WOMAC, UCLA and VR-12 PCS significantly improved after second stage surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our two-stage approach for periprosthetic joint infection shows high infection eradication and implant survivorship rates at short-term follow-up. Spacer-related complication rates were low, and we achieved high patient satisfaction rates and low pain levels already during the spacer period. To further simplify comparison between different spacer designs, we propose a new hip spacer classification system.

Does the use of a closed-suction drain reduce the effectiveness of an antibiotic-loaded spacer in two-stage exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic hip infection? A prospective, randomized, controlled study

Background

There is a concern regarding the use of a closed-suction drain (CSD) in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection as it may decrease the antibiotic concentrations in the joint fluids. The purpose of this study was to identify whether the use of a CSD could reduce local antibiotic concentrations following spacer implantation.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted at our institution between January 2018 and November 2018. We enrolled 32 patients undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic hip infection with an interim cement spacer containing 4-g vancomycin and 2-g meropenem per 40-g methyl-methacrylate cement polymer. Patients were randomized and evenly divided into the study group (non-CSD) and control group (CSD group) by sealed envelopes. Drainage samples of joint fluids (n = 160) were collected every 24 h for the first five days following spacer implantation. The antibiotic concentrations of drainage samples were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography, and the bioactivities of the drainage samples against methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA and MRSA) and E. coli were assessed.

Results

There was no significant difference in the decrease of vancomycin (study group vs. control group: 163.20 ± 77.05 vs. 162.39 ± 36.31; p = 0.917) and meropenem concentration (123.78 ± 21.04 vs. 117.27 ± 19.38; P = 0.548) between the two groups during the first five days following spacer implantation. All joint drainage samples in each group exhibited antibacterial activity against MSSA, MRSA and E. coli.

Conclusions

The use of CSD following the implantation of an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer does not reduce the effectiveness of such a spacer in two-stage exchange arthroplasty.

(Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-INR-17014162. Registered 26 December 2017.)

Is short-course systemic antibiotic therapy using an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer safe after resection for infected total knee arthroplasty? A comparative study

BACKGROUD/PURPOSE

Most patients who undergo two-stage exchange arthroplasty surgery for total knee arthroplasty prosthetic joint infection (TKA-PJI) receive a six-week course of systemic antibiotic treatment after the first stage procedure. However, the optimal duration of therapy has not been conclusively determined.

METHODS

We included 64 patients with periprosthetic knee infection who had undergone two-stage exchange arthroplasty. Between March 2003 and December 2009, 21 patients were given a short-course (less than 1 week) antibiotic treatment, and 43 were given a standard-course (4-6 weeks) treatment during the interim period. We compared length of hospital stay, duration of intravenous and overall systemic antibiotic treatments, and rate of recurrent periprosthetic knee infection between groups.

RESULTS

Short-course antibiotic treatment was associated with a shorter hospital stay and a shorter duration of intravenous and systemic antibiotic treatment. Implant survival regarding re-resection arthroplasty and chronic oral antibiotic suppression as primary endpoints was not significant different statistically between two groups (p = 0.317). The 1-year implant survival rates were 91.7% in the short-course group and 89.8% in the standard-course group. The 5-year implant survival rates were 85.2% and 74.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

After the first stage of resection arthroplasty for a two-stage exchange arthroplasty, a short course of antibiotic treatment had similar implant survival rates in comparison to the standard 6-week course. With radical debridement combined with an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer along with serial monitoring of the patient, a short course antibiotic treatment may be adequate in patients with TKA-PJI.