Management of septic arthritis and prosthetic joint infection.

Management of joint infection is an evolving topic. This article reviews the literature on the management of native and prosthetic joint infection and suggests some areas of improvement in short- and long-term management which could lead to better patient outcomes. Surgical management is the mainstay of treatment for native or prosthetic knee infection and aspiration should only be used for diagnostic purposes. A multidisciplinary team approach and compliance with national guidelines, alongside referral networks and pooling of expertise, should be mandatory to improve patient outcomes.

A Randomized Trial of Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation Versus Alternative Forms of Surgical Cartilage Management in Patients With a Failed Primary Treatment for Chondral or Osteochondral Defects in the Knee.

BACKGROUND: There are limited randomized controlled trials with long-term outcomes comparing autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) versus alternative forms of surgical cartilage management within the knee. PURPOSE: To determine at 5 years after surgery whether ACI was superior to alternative forms of cartilage management in patients after a failed previous treatment for chondral or osteochondral defects in the knee. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: In total, 390 participants were randomly assigned to receive either ACI or alternative management. Patients aged 18 to 55 years with one or two symptomatic cartilage defects who had failed 1 previous therapeutic surgical procedure in excess of 6 months prior were included. Dual primary outcome measures were used: (1) patient-completed Lysholm knee score and (2) time from surgery to cessation of treatment benefit. Secondary outcome measures included International Knee Documentation Committee and Cincinnati Knee Rating System scores, as well as number of serious adverse events. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Lysholm scores were improved by 1 year in both groups (15.4 points [95% CI, 11.9 to 18.8] and 15.2 points [95% CI, 11.6 to 18.9]) for ACI and alternative, with this improvement sustained over the duration of the trial. However, no evidence of a difference was found between the groups at 5 years (2.9 points; 95% CI, -1.8 to 7.5; P = .46). Approximately half of the participants (55%; 95% CI, 47% to 64% with ACI) were still experiencing benefit at 5 years, with time to cessation of treatment benefit similar in both groups (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.32; P > .99). There was a differential effect on Lysholm scores in patients without previous marrow stimulation compared with those with marrow stimulation (P = .03; 6.4 points in favor of ACI; 95% CI, -0.4 to 13.1). More participants experienced a serious adverse event with ACI (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Over 5 years, there was no evidence of a difference in Lysholm scores between ACI and alternative management in patients who had previously failed treatment. Previous marrow stimulation had a detrimental effect on the outcome of ACI. REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: 48911177.

A Case of Intermittent Exercise-Induced Foot Drop in a Recreational Runner.

Foot drop is a reduction in ankle dorsiflexion during the swing phase of gait. We report a case of a 51-year-old recreational runner and cyclist who presented with intermittent left foot drop initially triggered by running distances in excess of 10 km. The patient was investigated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine and leg, nerve conduction studies, electromyography, and compartment pressure testing, which were all normal. Surgical release of fascia, which was restricting the common peroneal (fibular) nerve, failed to resolve her symptoms. Subsequent brain MRI revealed demyelination. This case describes the unusual case of a recreational runner presenting with exercise-induced foot drop secondary to multiple sclerosis (MS). Motor fatigability is a common feature of MS, and this case highlights the need to remain cognizant of central and peripheral causes of exertional lower limb pathology, particularly in the absence of pain.

Successful two-stage revision of a KineSpring® joint unloading implant: a case study.

Few nonsurgical treatment options are available to the patient with debilitating knee osteoarthritis (OA) that is refractory to conservative care. The KineSpring® System joint unloading implant is a unique device that reduces the load carried by the medial compartment of the knee joint by up to 13 kilograms during the stance phase of gait. We report a case of a male patient who underwent implant with the KineSpring System for symptomatic knee OA but subsequently required revision due to local infection. We performed a novel two-stage revision procedure where the absorber unit was removed in the first phase and a new absorber was placed 3 months later after the infection resolved. A key finding of this case was that knee OA pain resolved with the KineSpring System, returned following explant of the absorber unit, and resolved again following implant of the new absorber. Another important aspect of this case was that the femoral and tibial bases of the KineSpring System remained in situ, which simplified each phase of the revision procedure.

The use of intradiscal steroid therapy for lumbar spinal discogenic pain: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective randomized study of the therapeutic effect of intradiscal steroid injection compared to a saline placebo. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether intradiscal steroid injection influences the clinical outcome at 1 year in patients with chronic low back pain of discogenic origin. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Steroids have been used empirically in the treatment of back pain. They have been used in the epidural space and around nerve roots and have been used as an alternative to chymopapain within the disc. Previous studies have, however, shown variable results. METHODS: A total of 120 patients with chronic low back pain of discogenic origin were enrolled in the study. At discography, if they had concordant pain, they were randomized to injection of normal saline or methylprednisolone into the disc space. These patients were prospectively followed up for 12 months, and they were asked to report pain according to a visual analogue score and their Oswestry Disability Index was recorded. The primary outcome measure was determined as a percentage change in disability, and the results were analyzed using independent samples t test. The secondary outcome measure was a change in the pain score, and this was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between the two groups (P = 0.71). The steroid group had a mean change of 2.28 (SE 2.49) in percentage disability, while the saline group had a mean change of 3.42 (SE 1.79). With respect to the change in pain score, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.72). Those patients who had saline injection had a median change in pain score of 0 (interquartile range -1 to 1), whereas those given steroid treatment had a median change in pain score of 0 (interquartile range -0.25 to 1). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that intradiscal steroid injections do not improve the clinical outcome in patients with discogenic back pain compared with placebo.

Bone mineral density after removal of rigid plates from forearm fractures: preliminary report.

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured on three occasions following removal of metal plates used to fixate diaphyseal forearm fractures in eight patients (mean age 38.5 years). At plate removal the mean BMD of the distal radius/ulna and the ulnar shaft sites were, respectively, 10.2% and 2.1% lower than on the nonfractured side. The apparent volumetric BMD (BMDvol) at the ulnar fracture site was 4.3% lower. At 6 months follow-up ( n = 5) the mean ulnar shaft BMD had increased by 6.4% ( P = 0.04), resulting in complete recovery of BMD, whereas the increase in BMDvol did not reach the BMDvol of the control side. No recovery was found at the distal radius/ulna site. We conclude that there is a small, partially reversible bone density deficit in the ulnar shaft that has been underneath the plate. Although the decreased bone density may in part be responsible for increased refracture risk at the fracture site immediately after plate removal, it is negligible after 6 months. The cessation of the effects of stress shielding is probably responsible for the increased bone density after plate removal.