Withholding Preoperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Knee Prosthesis Revision: A Retrospective Analysis on Culture Results and Risk of Infection.

BACKGROUND: A significant amount of patients undergoing revision surgery of a prosthetic joint turn out to have an infection. Withholding preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in these patients to optimize culture yield during revision surgery remains a matter of debate. The aim of our study was to determine (1) the rate of positive intraoperative cultures with or without preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and (2) the incidence of a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) during the follow-up in the 2 groups. METHODS: Medical files of patients in whom preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis was withheld until culture samples were taken (2007-2010, n = 284) and in whom antibiotic prophylaxis was given during the induction of anesthesia (2010-2013, n = 141) were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: The percentage of ≥1 positive cultures was the same in the group without (26%) and with preoperative prophylaxis (27%; P value, .7). PJI was diagnosed during revision surgery according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria in 6.7% patients not receiving preoperative prophylaxis and in 7.0% receiving it (P value, .79). We found no important differences in the type of microorganisms that were isolated in both groups. During a 3-month follow-up, an early PJI developed in patients undergoing total revision surgery in 6.4% of the nonpreoperative prophylaxis group vs 1.6% in the preoperative prophylaxis group (P value, .1). CONCLUSION: Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis does not reduce culture yield in patients undergoing knee revision surgery. Our data show a trend toward a higher PJI rate in the postoperative period of total revision surgery when preoperative prophylaxis is withheld.

Correlation Between Visual Inspection and Ultrasonography to Identify the Distal Branches of the Superficial Peroneal Nerve: A Cadaveric Study.

The anatomy of the superficial peroneal nerve (SPN) and, more precisely, of the distal branches of the SPN at the ankle has attracted interest owing to the possibility of injury when performing ankle arthroscopy. The anterolateral portal is one of the most commonly used portals in ankle arthroscopy, and the intermediate dorsal cutaneous nerve can easily be injured during portal placement. The purpose of the present study was to assess whether visual inspection and palpation of the cutaneous nerves at the ankle differed from examination with ultrasonography and whether the 2 examination techniques correlated with the anatomic location of the SPN, which was verified by cadaver dissection. First, visual examination and palpation was performed to identify the SPN, after which 12 cadaver legs from separate specimens were examined with ultrasonography to mark the course of the SPN. We then measured the distance between the nerve as identified with gross visualization/palpation and ultrasound examination, and compared these with the precise location determined by anatomic dissection. The use of ultrasonography to determine the course of the SPN was good or excellent in 11 of the 12 legs (91.7%) studied. In contrast, gross visualization/palpation was good or excellent in 4 legs (33.3%). Excellent agreement was observed between the ultrasound markings and the anatomic dissection results. However, the visual examination poorly identified the course and the anatomic variations of the nerve branches evidenced in the anatomic dissection. From these findings in cadaver specimens, ultrasound identification of the SPN and its branches is likely preferable to gross visualization/palpation before placement of the anterolateral arthroscopic portal to the ankle.

Is elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic safe? A multi-center prospective study in a high incidence area.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the evolution of patients admitted for elective orthopaedic surgery during the immediate post-COVID-19 peak of the pandemic. METHODS: This is a multi-center, observational study conducted in 8 high complexity hospitals of Catalonia, one of the highest COVID-19 incidence areas in Spain. We included patients ≥18 years of age undergoing elective surgery (total knee or hip arthroplasty, knee or hip revision arthroplasty, shoulder or knee arthroscopy, hand or wrist surgery, forefoot surgery, or hardware removal) after the COVID-19 peak (between May 5th and June 30th, 2020). The main exclusion criterion was a positive result for SARS-CoV-2 PCR within the 7 days before the surgery. The primary outcomes were postoperative complications within 60 days (+/-30) or hospital readmission due to a COVID-19 infection. Following the recommendations of the International Consensus Group (ICM), elective surgeries were re-started when the nationwide lockdown was lifted. Before the surgery, patients were contacted by phone to rule out any exposure to confirmed COVID-19 cases, a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay was performed in all patients 48-72 hours before hospital admission, and they were asked to maintain home confinement until the day of the surgery. RESULTS: 675 patients were included: 189 patients in the arthroplasty group (28%) and 486 in the ambulatory surgery group (72%). Mean [SD] age was 57.6 [15.3] years. The mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 2.21 (SD = 2.01, Min = 0, Max = 13). A total of 84 patients (12.75%) obtained an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥ 3, showing no association between the ASA score and the risk of developing COVID-19 symptoms at follow-up (χ 2 (4) = 0.77, P = 0.94). The mean occupation rate of hospital beds for COVID-19 patients was 13% and the mean occupation rate of critical care beds for COVID-19 patients was 27% at the time of re-introducing elective surgeries. These were important rates to consider to decide when to reintroduce elective surgeries after lockdown. Surgical time, time of ischemia and intra-operative bleeding were not related with a higher risk of developing COVID-19 post-operatively (χ 2 (1) = 0.00, P = 0.98); (χ 2 (2) = 2.05, P = 0.36); (χ 2 (2) = 0.37, P = 0.83). Only 2 patients (0.3 %) presented with a suspected COVID-19 infection at follow-up. None of them presented with pneumonia or required confirmation by a reverse transcription PCR assay. Hospital re-admission was not needed for these patients. CONCLUSION: The risk of developing COVID-19 during the immediate post-COVID-19 peak in a region with a high incidence of COVID-19 has not been proved. These data suggest that elective orthopaedic surgeries can be resumed when assertive and strict protocols are followed.

The effect of percutaneous release of the medial collateral ligament in arthroscopic medial meniscectomy on functional outcome.

BACKGROUND: Pie crusting (PC) of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) in the knee has been used empirically to achieve more space in the medial compartment during knee arthroscopy. However, there are no reported studies analyzing the functional results of the application of the PC technique to the MCL in patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscectomy of the medial meniscus, and to determine the rate of iatrogenic injury and associated morbidity. DESCRIPTION OF TECHNIQUE: The patient was in a supine position with a tourniquet and a side post. Percutaneous controlled release of the posterior part of the MCL was performed using an intramuscular needle, and a mild valgus force was applied while viewing with the arthroscope of the controlled progressive gain in medial compartment space. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective clinical study of 140 patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscectomy with or without MCL PC was conducted. Tegner and Lysholm tests and visual analogue scales were used to assess pain and functional results. RESULTS: The patients in the group with meniscectomy and PC had higher scores on the Lysholm scale, less pain at rest after two months, and achieved significantly better pain control during physical activity at six months. No complication, residual instability, or iatrogenic injury to the cartilage were observed in the meniscectomy plus PC group. CONCLUSION: The MCL PC technique for medial meniscectomy is a safe and effective way to reduce iatrogenic injury to the cartilage and does not affect knee stability. Decompression of the medial compartment results in better functional outcomes at two months and lesser pain during physical activity at six months.

A Prolonged Post-Operative Antibiotic Regimen Reduced the Rate of Prosthetic Joint Infection after Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the prosthetic joint infection (PJI) rate after knee revision arthroplasty in two consecutive periods with different antibiotic prophylaxis: short (one day) versus long (five days). METHODS: From January 2007 to September 2010 antibiotic prophylaxis consisted of 800 mg of teicoplanin and 2 g of ceftazidime intravenously and 1 g of ceftazidime two hours after the first dose. From October 2010, it was prolonged post-operatively using vancomycin and ceftazidime intravenously until the fifth day. RESULTS: During the study period, 341 revision surgeries met the inclusion criteria. The PJI rate was lower in the long-prophylaxis group (2.2% versus 6.9%, p=0.049). Prolonged post-operative antibiotic treatment was the only variable associated independently with a lower rate of PJI (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.07-0.99).