scholarly journals 195. Does Intra-Articular Corticosteroid Injection in the Pre-Operative Period Increase the Risk of Joint Infection Following Hip or Knee Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rheumatology ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. i132-i132
Author(s):  
Nicolas Ellerby ◽  
Samantha Hider ◽  
Christian Mallen ◽  
John Belcher ◽  
Edward Roddy
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Period Increase

scholarly journals Safety of intraarticular corticosteroid injection preceding hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis amid resolving COVID-19 arthroplasty restrictions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Cheok ◽  
Matthew Jennings ◽  
Alessandro Aprato ◽  
Narlaka Jayasekera ◽  
Ruurd L Jaarsma
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Hip And Knee Arthroplasty

ABSTRACT Intraarticular corticosteroid injection (ICSI) is a widely practiced management for hip and knee osteoarthritis. Imposed delays to arthroplasty during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic have led us to postulate that many patients have opted for recent ICSI. We compared the odds of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who were or were not administered ICSI within 12 months prior to hip or knee arthroplasty. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science was performed in February 2021, with studies assessing the effect of ICS on PJI rates identified. All studies, which included patients that received ICSI in the 12 months prior to primary hip and knee arthroplasty, were included. In total 12 studies were included: four studies with 209 353 hips and eight studies with 438 440 knees. ICSI administered in the 12 months prior to hip arthroplasty increased the odds of PJI [odds ratio (OR) = 1.17, P = 0.04]. This was not the case for knees. Subgroup analysis showed significantly higher odds of PJI in both hip [OR = 1.45, P = 0.002] and knee arthroplasty [OR = 2.04; P = 0.04] when ICSI was within the preceding 3 months of surgery. A significantly higher odds of PJI were seen in patients receiving ICSI within the 12 months prior to hip arthroplasty. Subgroup analysis showed increased odds of PJI in both hip and knee arthroplasty, in patients receiving ICSI within 3 months prior to their arthroplasty. We recommend delaying knee arthroplasty for at least 3 months after ICSI and possibly longer for hip arthroplasty. Level of Evidence Level III - Systematic Review of Level II and III Studies.

scholarly journals Improved Perioperative Sleep Quality or Quantity Reduces Pain after Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1389-1397
Author(s):  
Song‐po Shen ◽  
Ying‐jie Wang ◽  
Qiang Zhang ◽  
Hua Qiang ◽  
Xi‐sheng Weng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Total Hip

scholarly journals Corticosteroid Injection Alone or Combined with Surgical Excision of Keloids versus Other Therapies Including Ionising Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-54
Author(s):  
Ru Wang ◽  
Patricia L. Danielsen ◽  
Magnus S. Ågren ◽  
Janine Duke ◽  
Fiona Wood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Interferon Α ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Intralesional Corticosteroid ◽  
Intralesional Injections ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Keloid scars are difficult to manage and remain a therapeutic challenge. Corticosteroid therapy alone or ionising radiation (radiotherapy) alone or combined with surgery are first-line treatments, but the scientific justification for these treatments is unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is to assess the effects of intralesional corticosteroid injection in treating keloids or preventing their recurrence after surgical removal. Searches for RCTs were conducted through the MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO and Cochrane databases from January 1974 to September 2017. Two authors independently reviewed study eligibility, extracted data, analysed the results, and assessed methodological quality. Sixteen RCTs that included more than 814 patients were scrutinised. The quality of evidence for most outcomes was moderate to high. In 10 RCTs, corticosteroid intralesional injections were compared with 5-fluorouracil, etanercept, cryosurgery, botulinum toxin, topical corticosteroid under a silicone dressing, and radiotherapy. Corticosteroid intralesional injections were more effective than radiotherapy (RR 3.3, 95% CI: 1.4–8.1) but equipotent with the other interventions. In conjunction with keloid excision, corticosteroid treatment was compared with radiotherapy, interferon α-2b and verapamil. In two RCTs, there were fewer keloid recurrences (RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.21–0.89) demonstrated with adjuvant radiotherapy than with corticosteroid injections. More high-quality, large-scale RCTs are required to establish the effectiveness of corticosteroids and other therapies in keloid management.

scholarly journals Correction to: Robotic‑arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta‑analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junren Zhang ◽  
Wofhatwa Solomon Ndou ◽  
Nathan Ng ◽  
Paul Gaston ◽  
Philip M. Simpson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Total Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Robotic Arm ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Total Knee ◽  
Improved Accuracy

A correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06522-x

scholarly journals Efficacy of hydrofibre dressing following total joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002110126
Author(s):  
Raman Mundi ◽  
Harman Chaudhry ◽  
Seper Ekhtiari ◽  
Prabjit Ajrawat ◽  
Daniel M Tushinski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Total Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Observable Effect ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: In the United States, over 1,000,000 total joint arthroplasty (TJA) surgeries are performed annually and has been forecasted that this number will exceed 4,000,000 by the year 2030. Many different types of dressing exist for use in TJA surgery, and it is unclear if any of the newer, hydrofibre dressings are superior to traditional dressings at reducing rates of infections or improving wound healing. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of hydrofiber dressings on reducing complications. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the online databases MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hydrofibre dressings to a standard dressing were included. Summary measures are reported as odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcome was prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Secondary outcomes included blisters, dressing changes and wound irritation. Results: 5 RCTs were included. Hydrofibre dressing had no observable effect on PJI or wound irritation (OR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14–1.98; p = 0.35). Hydrofibre dressings reduced the rate of blisters (OR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14–0.90; p = 0.03) and number of dressing changes (MD -1.89; 95% CI, -2.68 to -1.11). Conclusions: In conclusion, evidence suggests hydrofibre dressings have no observable effect on PJI and wound irritation. Evidence for reduction in blisters and number of dressings is modest given wide CIs and biased trial methodologies. Use of hydrofibre dressings should be considered inconclusive for mitigating major complications in light of current best evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document