scholarly journals Economic advantage of ‘self-made’ antibiotic-loaded spacer compared to prefabricated antibiotic-loaded spacer and spacer molds in two-staged revision arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 557-562
Author(s):  
K Moerenhout ◽  
S Steinmetz ◽  
M Vautrin ◽  
S Picarra ◽  
G Udin ◽  
...  

Infection after total hip or total knee arthroplasty is a serious complication implying great costs for the health care system. Amongst the different treatment options, the two-step exchange using a spacer in the interval is a valid option. We evaluate the economic impact of our self-made antibiotic-loaded hip and knee cement spacers compared with prefabricated spacers and spacer molds. Costs to prepare self-made cement spacers are detailed for each spacer type. We also assess the intraoperative time spent for fabricating our self-made hip and knee spacers. The price of these self-made knee spacer is 514 CHF (450 EUR / 505 USD) if non-articulated and 535 CHF (470 EUR / 525 USD) if articulated ; the price for the self-made hip spacer is 749 CHF (760 EUR / 735 USD). Our average preparation time is 14 minutes for our self-made knee spacers and 16 minutes for our self-made hip spacers. While the senior surgeon is fabricating the self-spacers, another surgeon of the team continues intensive irrigation and debridement. Thus, no time is lost waiting for the self-spacer to be fabricated. In our hands, self-made hip and knee spacers are at least 40-50% cheaper than prefabricated spacers and spacer-molds. This is a serious economic advantage in this already expensive surgery. When done in teamwork, self-spacer fabrication does not increase the surgery time. The economic advantage is added to the main and most important advantage of self- made spacers, which remains the possibility of patient adapted anatomical reconstruction of the joint.


2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (6 Supple A) ◽  
pp. 171-176
Author(s):  
Antonio Klasan ◽  
Arne Schermuksnies ◽  
Florian Gerber ◽  
Matt Bowman ◽  
Susanne Fuchs-Winkelmann ◽  
...  

Aims The management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging. The correct antibiotic management remains elusive due to differences in epidemiology and resistance between countries, and reports in the literature. Before the efficacy of surgical treatment is investigated, it is crucial to analyze the bacterial strains causing PJI, especially for patients in whom no organisms are grown. Methods A review of all revision TKAs which were undertaken between 2006 and 2018 in a tertiary referral centre was performed, including all those meeting the consensus criteria for PJI, in which organisms were identified. Using a cluster analysis, three chronological time periods were created. We then evaluated the antibiotic resistance of the identified bacteria between these three clusters and the effectiveness of our antibiotic regime. Results We identified 129 PJIs with 161 culture identified bacteria in 97 patients. Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were identified in 46.6% cultures, followed by Staphylococcus aureus in 19.8%. The overall resistance to antibiotics did not increase significantly during the study period (p = 0.454). However, CNS resistance to teicoplanin (p < 0.001), fosfomycin (p = 0.016), and tetracycline (p = 0.014) increased significantly. Vancomycin had an 84.4% overall sensitivity and 100% CNS sensitivity and was the most effective agent. Conclusion Although we were unable to show an overall increase in antibiotic resistance in organisms that cause PJI after TKA during the study period, this was not true for CNS. It is concerning that resistance of CNS to new antibiotics, but not vancomycin, has increased in a little more than a decade. Our findings suggest that referral centres should continuously monitor their bacteriological analyses, as these have significant implications for prophylactic treatment in both primary arthroplasty and revision arthroplasty for PJI. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):171–176.





2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mukartihal Ravikumar ◽  
Daniel Kendoff ◽  
Mustafa Citak ◽  
Stefan Luck ◽  
Thorsten Gehrke ◽  
...  

Background and Purpose: Two-stage revision arthroplasty is a common technique for the treatment of infected total knee replacement. Few reports have addressed the conversion of a fused knee into a total knee replacement. However, there is no case reported of converting an infected fused knee into a hinge knee using a one-stage procedure. Methods: We report on a 51-year old male patient with an infected fused knee after multiple surgeries. Results and Interpretation: A one-stage conversion of septic fused knee into total knee arthroplasty by a rotational hinge prosthesis was performed. The case highlights that with profound preoperative assessment, meticulous surgical technique, combined antibiotic treatment and the right implant, one-stage revision in a surgical challenge may have a role as a treatment option with good functional outcome.





Author(s):  
Anouk G.M. Didden ◽  
Ilona M. Punt ◽  
Peter Z. Feczko ◽  
Antoine F. Lenssen


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
Lo Chi-Kin ◽  
Lai Chun-Kit ◽  
Tsang Koon-Ho ◽  
Wong Yiu-Chung

Lymphoma associated with total knee arthroplasty is a rare condition. We report a case of non-Hodgkin lymphoma mimicking an infected total knee arthroplasty. A 73-year-old woman who received left total knee replacement presented with fever and a discharging sinus over her left knee 12 weeks after surgery. The diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection was made and a two-stage revision arthroplasty planned. After implant removal and insertion of an antibiotic spacer in the first-stage operation, culture results of all intraoperative specimens were negative but the pathology report showed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. She then received chemotherapy and a second-stage reconstruction operation. The wound healed uneventfully and she regained independent mobility.



2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (5) ◽  
pp. 302-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
SS Sarmah ◽  
S Patel ◽  
G Reading ◽  
M El-Husseiny ◽  
S Douglas ◽  
...  

INTRODUCTION The number of total knee arthroplasties performed continues to rise annually and it would be expected that complications, which include periprosthetic fractures, will also therefore become more commonplace. This article reviews the current literature regarding this injury and identifies the treatment principles that enable patients to regain optimal function. METHODS A comprehensive search of the Pubmed and Embase™ databases was performed to identify relevant articles. Keywords and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms included in the search strategy were ‘periprosthetic fracture(s)’, ‘femur’, ‘tibia’, ‘patella(r)’, ‘complication(s)’, ‘failure(s)’, ‘risk(s)’, ‘prevalence’, ‘incidence’, ‘epidemiology’ and ‘classification(s)’. The search was limited to all articles published in English and reference lists from the original articles were reviewed to identify pertinent articles to include in this review. A total number of 43 studies were identified. RESULTS Common treatment aims have been identified when managing patients with a periprosthetic fracture around total knee arthoplasty. The main criterion that determines which option to choose is the degree of remaining bone stock and the amount of fracture displacement. CONCLUSIONS Treatment of a periprosthetic fracture around total knee arthroplasty will either be non-operative, osteosynthesis or revision arthroplasty. It is imperative that a suitable option is chosen and based on the published literature, pathways are outlined to aid the surgeon.



2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 430-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry J Waldman ◽  
Emmanuel Hostin ◽  
Michael A Mont ◽  
David S Hungerford


2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niraj V Kalore ◽  
Terence J Gioe ◽  
Jasvinder A Singh

Infection following total knee arthroplasty can be difficult to diagnose and treat. Diagnosis is multifactorial and relies on the clinical picture, radiographs, bone scans, serologic tests, synovial fluid examination, intra-operative culture and histology. Newer techniques including ultrasonication and molecular diagnostic studies are playing an expanded role. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty with antibiotic cement and 4-6 weeks of intravenous antibiotic treatment remains the most successful intervention for infection eradication. There is no consensus on the optimum type of interval antibiotic cement spacer. There is a limited role for irrigation and debridement, direct one-stage exchange, chronic antibiotic suppression and salvage procedures like arthrodesis and amputation. We examine the literature on each of the diagnostic modalities and treatment options in brief and explain their current significance.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document