RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: There is an increasing interest in the use of intra-articular (IA) antibiotic infusion as a stand-alone or adjuvant therapy to standard revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence with respect to this up-and-coming treatment modality. METHODS: A systematic review of studies published until April 2023 was conducted using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Quality assessment was performed with the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. Inclusion criteria were adult patients (≥ 18 years) with a mean follow-up of ≥ 11 months and a score ≥ 6 on the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. Primary outcome was eradication of infection. RESULTS: 15 articles, encompassing 631 PJIs in 626 patients, were included in the final analysis, all level IV case series. The majority was treated with single-stage revision with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (79.1%). The remaining PJIs were treated with stand-alone IA antibiotic infusion (12.2%), DAIR (debridement, antibiotics and implant retention) with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (5.7%) or two-stage revision with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (3.0%). Mean duration of IA antibiotic infusion was 19 days (range 3-50). An overall failure rate of approximately 11% was found. In total 117 complications occurred, 71 were non-catheter-related and 46 were catheter-related. The most common catheter-related complications were premature loss of the catheter (18/46) and elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine levels (12/46). CONCLUSIONS: Due to the lack of comparative studies the (added) benefit of IA antibiotic infusion in the treatment of PJI remains uncertain. Based on the current evidence, we would advise against using it as a stand-alone treatment. A prospective randomized controlled trial using a well-described infusion protocol is needed to see if the potential benefits justify the increased costs and potential complications of this treatment modality.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite a plethora of literature reporting on the use of tranexamic acid (TXA) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), little is available on its effect on post-operative hidden blood loss and even less on its use in the direct anterior approach (DAA), which is gaining popularity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was designed as a prospective, double blind, single centre, randomized controlled trial. Sixty patients were allocated to intravenous administration of 1.5 g of TXA just before wound closure while 60 patients were allocated to topical application of 3.0 g of TXA via a subfascial drain at the end of the procedure. Post-operative blood loss was (1) calculated via a well-established formula based on pre- and post-operative Hb levels, patients characteristics and intra-operative blood loss and (2) measured via the amount that collected in the subfascial drain over time. RESULTS: No statistical significant difference in post-operative blood loss was found, neither when the formula was used (0.55 L [topical] vs 0.67 L [IV]; p = .140) nor when looking at the drain output (0.25 L [topical] vs 0.29 L [IV]; p = .108). No significant difference in secondary outcome measures, such as transfusion of units of packed red blood cells, length of hospital stay or the occurrence of venous thromboembolisms, could be found either. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides detailed insights into the intra- and post-operative blood loss in DAA THA and shows that topical and IV TXA have similar effects on hidden blood loss. Clinical Trial Number: NCT01940692. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: Level I-Randomized Controlled Trial.