Graft-Preserving Arthroscopic Debridement With Hardware Removal Is Effective for Septic Arthritis After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Clinical, Arthrometric, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic debridement with graft preservation has been advocated as the treatment of choice for septic arthritis after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but no previous studies have investigated if hardware removal, while retaining the graft in situ, improves the success rate. Moreover, it is unclear whether the premature removal of fixation devices may affect graft integration and knee stability. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to assess the clinical and functional outcomes of patients with septic arthritis after ACL reconstruction who underwent arthroscopic debridement, while retaining the graft in situ but removing fixation devices, and to determine if premature hardware removal affects graft integrity and function. The hypothesis was that arthroscopic debridement with hardware removal would be effective in eradicating infections while not compromising graft integration and function. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: From a cohort of 2384 cases of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction, 24 patients with postoperative septic arthritis were included for the analysis; 18 patients were available for a clinical evaluation using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lysholm score, and Tegner score at a minimum 12-month follow-up. Knee laxity was assessed clinically with standardized manual laxity tests and instrumentally using an arthrometer and a triaxial accelerometer. Additionally, 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at final follow-up was performed, focusing on the graft signal, the cartilage status, and the occurrence of arthrofibrosis. RESULTS: Eradication of the infection was achieved in all cases, and only 1 graft removal was performed because of insufficient tension. Among the remaining 23 patients, a single arthroscopic debridement procedure with hardware removal while preserving the graft was effective in 21 cases (91%) at a mean of 30 ± 37 days from ACL reconstruction to debridement. At last follow-up, 2 patients required a further ACL revision procedure. The mean IKDC, WOMAC, Lysholm, and Tegner scores of the patients available for the clinical evaluation were 75 ± 19, 90 ± 8, 79 ± 21, and 6 ± 2, respectively. No abnormal laxity was reported on manual testing, and arthrometric and accelerometer tests also demonstrated good knee stability (mean KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference was 1.6 ± 1.2 mm at manual maximum force). On MRI, a good graft signal was found in 50% of cases, while concomitant signs of arthrofibrosis were detected in 81% of patients. Severe cartilage defects (International Cartilage Repair Society grade ≥3) were reported in 63% of cases. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic debridement with hardware removal was effective in the eradication of infections after ACL reconstruction with extra-articular fixation while preserving graft integrity without compromising knee stability. Patients and surgeons should be aware of complications that might affect the outcome, particularly arthrofibrosis and chondrolysis.

Evaluation of Blood Loss and Implant Alignment after Total Knee Arthroplasty with Inertial Based Extramedullary Femoral Cutting Guide.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare, in terms of blood loss and implant alignment, a new generation of smart extramedullary (EM) cutting guides with the conventional intramedullary (IM) guide for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The hypothesis was that the EM system would result in less blood loss and fewer days of hospitalization, while ensuring equal or higher accuracy in the alignment of the femoral implant. Methods Thirty-six patients were enrolled for the present study: 18 patients underwent TKA using the EM guide and for the other 18 patients the IM guide was used. Preoperative and postoperative X-rays were acquired. The preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin values were compared. Lastly, length of hospital stay was recorded. Results The hemoglobin difference was significantly lower in the EM group. The alignment of the prosthetic femoral implant in the two groups was comparable but all patients in the EM cohort had a final alignment within 3 degrees of range on the frontal view, while 22% of the patients in the IM cohort had a final alignment exceeding 3 degrees of range. The mean hospitalization duration showed no significant difference between groups, though EM group showed 1.6 days less compared with IM group. Conclusions The inertial-based EM guide system could be useful for decreasing blood loss compared with conventional guide. This device tended to have better results even in terms of accuracy, but this difference was not significant. Level of Evidence This is a level II, prospective cohort study.