Vascular Injury After Knee Dislocation: A Meta-Analysis Update.

INTRODUCTION: Multisystem injuries affecting vasculature and nerves can be detrimental sequelae of knee dislocations (KDs). The purpose of this study was to provide an update of the current literature since the conducted search used in the publication of Medina et al on May 3, 2013, to evaluate (1) the frequency of vascular and neurologic injury after KD, (2) the frequency with which surgical intervention was conducted for vascular injury in this setting, and (3) the frequency with which each imaging modality was used to detect vascular injury. METHODS: A two-author screening process was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using the MEDLINE database. Frequency of vascular injury, surgical intervention, and amputation after KD were analyzed. Diagnostic modalities used in the acute-care setting were also evaluated. RESULTS: Nineteen articles were analyzed for a total of 37,087 KDs. Of these, 10.7% sustained vascular injuries and 19.6% sustained nerve injuries. Overall, 62.2% of patients with vascular injury underwent surgical repair and 2.2% limbs resulted in amputation. Angiography was the most frequently used diagnostic modality (91.7%). DISCUSSION: This review updates our understanding on the clinical implications of KDs including frequency of vascular injury (10.7%), amputation (2.2%), and nerve injuries (19.6%). Compared with prior literature, there was an increased prevalence of KD1 (32.4%) and lateral KDs (80.4%). Most vascular injuries after KD undergo surgical repair (62.2%).

Effects of immunocompromised status on diagnostic criteria in septic arthritis.

Introduction: Septic arthritis is an orthopaedic emergency, with permanent cartilage damage possible within hours of the onset of symptoms. Diagnostic criteria for septic arthritis in immunocompetent patients are well established, however, there is a paucity of literature evaluating diagnostic criteria in immunocompromised patients. The purpose of this retrospective case-control study was to evaluate the laboratory and clinical information of immunocompromised patients with septic arthritis and compare them to immunocompetent patients with septic arthritis to enable physicians to diagnose septic arthritis more accurately in this population. Methods: All patients at our institution, a level I trauma center, with a clinical diagnosis of septic arthritis between January 1, 2006 and November 1, 2021 were identified and reviewed retrospectively. Patients 18 years old or older were screened for immunocompromised status and those meeting criteria were included for review. The control cohort was matched by the joint affected and age. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test, Turkey's test, Mann-Whitney U test, independent sample t-test, and chi-square analysis. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: A total of 36 patients with positive joint aspirate cultures were compared (18 immunocompetent and 18 immunocompromised). The immunocompromised group had a significantly longer length of hospital stay than the immunocompetent group (p = 0.044). There was no significant difference in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (p = 0.852), peripheral white blood cell count (pWBC) (p = 0.696), joint aspirate white blood cell count (aWBC) (p = 0.901), polymorphonuclear cell percentage (PMN%) (p = 0.325), or total operations performed per patient (p = 0.365). Conclusion: At our institution, immunocompromised patients with septic arthritis did not have significantly different diagnostic laboratory values when compared to immunocompetent patients. This suggests that immunocompromised patients with suspicion of septic arthritis can be assessed with similar diagnostic criteria as immunocompetent individuals; however, a larger cohort study is needed to assess the difference more precisely in laboratory values.