Diagnosis and Management of Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty§

Minneapolis VA Medical Center and University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA.
The Open Orthopaedics Journal 03/2011; 5:86-91. DOI: 10.2174/1874325001105010086
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Infection following total knee arthroplasty can be difficult to diagnose and treat. Diagnosis is multifactorial and relies on the clinical picture, radiographs, bone scans, serologic tests, synovial fluid examination, intra-operative culture and histology. Newer techniques including ultrasonication and molecular diagnostic studies are playing an expanded role. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty with antibiotic cement and 4-6 weeks of intravenous antibiotic treatment remains the most successful intervention for infection eradication. There is no consensus on the optimum type of interval antibiotic cement spacer. There is a limited role for irrigation and debridement, direct one-stage exchange, chronic antibiotic suppression and salvage procedures like arthrodesis and amputation. We examine the literature on each of the diagnostic modalities and treatment options in brief and explain their current significance.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and other inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and white blood cell count (WCC) in diagnosis of PJI.
    International Orthopaedics 08/2014; 38(12). DOI:10.1007/s00264-014-2475-y
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diagnosis and management of low-grade periprosthetic knee infection are still controversial and debatable. The diagnosis of low-grade infection after total knee arthroplasty is often complex, as clinical symptomatology and diagnostic studies are highly conflicting and knees often exhibit well-fixed components. Although the criterion standard for staged reimplantation is interim placement of an antibiotic-loaded spacer, less-invasive surgical procedures have been advocated for managing infections caused by low-virulence bacteria. Debridement with polyethylene exchange and single-stage reimplantation could offer advantages, such as fewer surgeries, reduced potential for intraoperative complications, and lower direct social costs. The aim of this narrative review was to analyze the literature to evaluate the effectiveness of different surgical procedures in managing low-grade periprosthetic knee infections. Additionally, the most reliable investigations for diagnosing total knee infection caused by low-virulence bacteria were reviewed. Level of evidence Level V.
    Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 05/2014; 16(1). DOI:10.1007/s10195-014-0294-y
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Controversies still exist regarding the optimal diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in patients with prosthetic joint infections (PJI). How effective are preoperative and intraoperative cultures in isolating organisms and how do these culture results compare to one another? What are the results of surgical treatment of PJI in the hip and knee in an international, tertiary referral center cohort? One hundred sixteen patients (N = 59 hip PJI, N = 57 knee PJI) were recruited prospectively to registries at three international, tertiary referral centers between December 2008 to November 2011. Retrospective review of prospective registry data including demographics, microbiology results, and operative reports was performed. Preoperative synovial fluid aspiration yielded an organism in only 45.2% and 44.4% of cases, respectively, for knee and hip PJI. False-negative rates of preoperative aspiration relative to intraoperative culture were 56% and 46% in hip and knee PJI, respectively, with discordance rates of 25% and 21.4%, respectively. Rates of negative intraoperative cultures were 15% in hip PJI and 20.7% in knee PJI. Open debridement with prosthetic retention was the most common initial revision procedure performed (48.3% of hip PJI and 63.8% of knee PJI). This method of revision was successful in 41.3% of hip PJI and 59.4% of knee PJI. Initial failure rates for prosthetic revision was lower than debridement with prosthetic retention but remained substantial in both hip PJI (initial success of one-stage exchange 60% and two-stage exchange 70%) and knee PJI (initial success of one-stage exchange 80% and two-stage exchange 75%). Diagnosis and treatment of PJI remains challenging with difficulty in isolating the offending organism and with high rates of prosthetic revision and initial treatment failures. Future advances in organism isolation and international standardization of treatment protocols may improve patient outcomes.
    HSS Journal 02/2014; 10(1):36-44. DOI:10.1007/s11420-013-9366-4

Full-text (5 Sources)

Available from
May 16, 2014