Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_17_библиотеки_им_акад_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
66 Мб
Скачать
62
https://t.me/medicina_free
C. T. Penrose and M. P. Bolognesi
a b
6
. Fig. 6.4 ac Postoperative radiographs after limited hardware removal and TKA using computer navigation
a spatial frame or magnetic growing rod application after osteotomy followed by knee arthroplasty in a staged manner after completion of correction in all planes, removal of xation, likely with a time interval to allow for pin tract healing. Fixation of osteotomies can also involve intramedullary nails, external xation, and plates
c
and screws on the femoral, tibial, or both sides of the knee joint (Sculco etal. 2019).
Preoperative templating, intraoperative navigation applications, patient-specic instrumentation (PSI), and/or robotic platforms may provide utility in deter­mining which deformities are correctable through the
Post-Traumatic Arthritis
https://t.me/medicina_free
63
6
joint and which require osteotomy (Catani etal. 2012; Denjean etal. 2017). It is important to consider defor­mities of the tibia and femur separately when both exist, and authors have described a successful correction with osteotomy performed either staged or in the same set­ting as the arthroplasty (Catonné etal. 2019a; Catonné etal. 2019b; Demir etal. 2018).
> Doing deformity correction and arthroplasty in the
same setting has the obvious benet of only a single surgery. It is a technically challenging procedure with risks of complications related to increased blood loss and cement integration into an osteotomy site which could interfere with healing (Sculco etal. 2019).
Location and integrity of hardware on radiographs should include the number and trajectory of screws and plates, whether or not hardware is broken and if there are any bone defects. Review of prior imaging may be helpful as well as operative reports.
> It can be helpful to know what hardware is present in
case it needs to be removed either in part or in full and
to be informed about prior surgical approaches, espe-
cially if a lateral parapatellar arthrotomy was per-
formed to prevent further devascularization of the
patella.
options including subvastus, quadriceps snip, tibial tubercle osteotomy, banana peel of the patellar tendon, and lateral parapatellar arthrotomy, which can each play a useful role in providing adequate exposure in cer­tain cases (In et al. 2009; Lahav and DiMaio 2007; Lizaur-Utrilla etal. 2015; Lonner etal. 1999; Lahav and Hofmann 2007). Range of motion should also be care­fully assessed and documented, as patient expectations and surgical goals should be tailored to a patient’s pre­operative range of motion.
6.4 Intraoperative Considerations
Planning ahead and having all equipment available including burrs, hardware removal sets with necessary screwdrivers can eliminate intraoperative delays and reduce operative time. The diagnosis of PTA has been linked to both longer operative time and higher infec­tion rates and costs (Dexel etal. 2016; Kester etal. 2016; Ge etal. 2018).
> Preoperative workup for occult infection is important
especially in instances of prior infection, open frac­tures or traumatic arthrotomies, history of wound healing issues postoperative, and radiographic nd­ings concerning osteomyelitis.
Performing a medial approach after an extensive lat­eral parapatellar arthrotomy compromises additional geniculate arteries and could lead to osteonecrosis of the patella. The condition of the soft tissues needs to be carefully evaluated including the location of prior scars.
> It is generally recommended that the most lateral inci-
sion be used, and if existing incisions are not compat-
ible with surgical exposure then connecting at 90° or
greater angles is recommended.
Preoperative consultation with a plastic surgeon is sometimes advisable when skin quality or integrity is in question and local tissue aps including medial gastroc­nemius or even free aps may be necessary for coverage. The condition of the extensor mechanism should be evaluated with the patient’s ability to perform a straight leg raise. Patella alta and baja and extensor lag should be noted. Chronic patellar subluxations or dislocations and patella fractures can be encountered in the PTA patient, thus the subvastus approach and lateral retinac­ular release may need to be considered (Hudson etal.
2003; In etal. 2009; Houdek etal. 2015). The workhorse
medial parapatellar approach to the knee may not always be the best option in the post-traumatic arthritic patient and surgeons should have familiarity with other
Baseline erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) should be obtained in any post-traumatic patient with any concern for infection, and if either is high, aspiration can yield additional information. In some cases, it may be prudent to remove the hardware in a staged fashion and to obtain intraop­erative cultures to exclude infection, prior to proceeding with TKA (Lizaur-Utrilla etal. 2015; Pinter etal. 2020). This approach may be advisable when extensive hard­ware removal is required, prominent hardware may be contributing to symptoms, or when infection is sus­pected or has been conrmed. TKA in the PTA patient can be more technically demanding and may require additional resources including techniques, equipment, and implants that many arthroplasty surgeons may not routinely use for uncomplicated primary knee arthro­plasty (Dexel etal. 2016; Weiss etal. 2003a). Implants more typically associated with revision knee arthro­plasty including cones, sleeves, augments, stems, and higher levels of constraints should be available and used when deemed necessary. Small bone defects can be lled with cement technique, sometimes including a screw used as rebar.
> In general, the lowest level of constraint and hard-
ware that allows for a stable construct and joint
64
https://t.me/medicina_free
C. T. Penrose and M. P. Bolognesi
should be used on a case-by-case basis to achieve excellent long-term functional outcomes for the patient (Weiss etal. 2003a; Martin-Hernandez et al.
2018; Pancio etal. 2017).
It has been proposed that this should impact reim­bursement in a bundled payment model (Kester etal.
2016). Signicant improvements in pain control, range
of motion, and functional outcome occur after knee arthroplasty in PTA patients, and thus, despite higher
Similar to knee arthroplasty for other indications, cementless designs can be considered in PTA patients and may be an attractive option for younger patients but must be used judiciously and only for patients with ade­quate bone quality with careful attention to precision of bone cuts (Buechel 2002).
risks, it remains the optimal treatment for end-stage degenerative changes in these patients (Bedi and Haid­ukewych 2009; Saleh et al. 2016; Weiss etal. 2003b). Knee stiffness is more common and manipulation under anesthesia is more frequently required postoperatively for arthrobrosis in this patient population (Lunebourg etal. 2015; Weiss etal. 2003b; Saini and Trikha 2016). In
> Cemented arthroplasty is generally the preferred
6
technique for achieving early xation with aseptic
loosening being a relatively uncommon cause of fail-
ure in this patient population (Brockman etal. 2020;
Bala etal. 2015).
one large institutional series, the rate of revision for PTA patients was 25% at 15-year follow-up (Houdek etal. 2016). There are some instances with certain frac­tures in certain patients where TKA may be appropriate acutely after the time of injury (Benazzo etal. 2014; Par­ratte etal. 2011); however, the focus of this chapter is on
Unicompartmental arthroplasty, including medial, lateral, or patellofemoral, can be useful in the post­traumatic patient setting when only part of the knee
TKA in the PTA patient who generally develops degen­erative disease years after an injury and has often had
surgical treatment shortly after the time of injury. joint is affected, but evaluation of the ligaments and car­tilage surfaces in the other compartments is necessary before proceeding in order to reduce the risk of subse-
6.6 Conclusion
quent conversion to TKA (Buechel 2002; Konan and Haddad 2016; Lustig etal. 2012).
While many patients with soft tissue injuries around the
knee and fractures of the distal femur, proximal tibia,
> Technological adjuncts including GPS-based, com-
puter navigation, patient-specic instrumentation, or robotics may have helpful applications, particularly in settings where intramedullary guidance is not possi­ble or more difcult due to existing hardware or deformity (Kuo et al. 2011; Manzotti et al. 2012; Manzotti etal. 2014).
and patella will eventually develop post-traumatic
arthritis if given enough time, not all will require TKA
(Scott etal. 2015; Wasserstein etal. 2014). The rate of
PTA undoubtedly varies by numerous factors including
type and severity of injury, age, genetics, and treatment-
related variables. For patients who develop signicant
pain and negative impact on their quality of life as a
result of end-stage degenerative changes associated with
These adjuncts may obviate the need for extensive hardware removal, although the modalities that are based on preoperative imaging may encounter difcul­ties due to metal artifacts. A surgeon should be familiar with these techniques and using them for the rst time in a more challenging case is not advised.
PTA, TKA is the optimal treatment for reducing pain and restoring function. Thorough preoperative workup is especially important to evaluate candidacy for arthro­plasty and differentiating effects of PTA from other eti­ologies like infection, nonunion, pathology in the hip or spine. For those patients likely to benet from TKA, a surgical plan should be created, with backup plans, which can range from resembling a routine primary
6.5 Outcomes
total or partial knee arthroplasty to complex-staged reconstruction involving revision components and other
> Outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) per-
formed for post-traumatic arthritis (PTA) are inferior
compared to those for primary osteoarthritis with
regard to infection, deep vein thrombosis, implant
survival (revision), patient function (including stiff-
ness), and quality of life (Brockman etal. 2020; Bala
et al. 2015; Lunebourg et al. 2015; Houdek et al.
2016).
less frequently used techniques. Outcomes after TKA performed for PTA are well established to be inferior compared to those for primary osteoarthritis; however, signicant improvements for these patients do occur after knee arthroplasty, and thus despite higher risks, it remains the optimal treatment for many PTA patients. Surgeons and patients should both be aware of and have a discussion regarding the risks/benet prole of arthro-
Post-Traumatic Arthritis
https://t.me/medicina_free
65
6
plasty in the PTA patient population, customized as much as possible to the patient’s individual circum­stances and goals.
Take-Home Messages
5 Evaluation of post-traumatic arthritis begins
with a thorough history, physical examination, and radiographs and may include an investiga­tion for occult infection in selected patients.
5 Other etiologies of pain must be considered
(spine, hip, infection, nonunion).
5 Technical considerations may include working
around or removing hardware, utilizing techno­logical adjuncts such as navigation, as well as having revision-type implants to address either bone and/or ligamentous deciencies (e.g., metaphyseal xation, semi-constrained liners).
5 Complications including infection, stiffness/
arthrobrosis, and revision may be higher, but benets still often outweigh the risks, and shared decision- making with the patient to proceed with surgery when indicated is imperative.
References
Bala A, Penrose CT, Seyler TM, Mather RC 3rd, Wellman SS,
Bolognesi MP (2015) Outcomes after total knee arthroplasty for
post- traumatic arthritis. Knee 22(6):630–639 Bedi A, Haidukewych GJ (2009) Management of the posttraumatic
arthritic knee. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 17(2):88–101 Benazzo F, Rossi SM, Ghiara M, Zanardi A, Perticarini L, Combi A
(2014) Total knee replacement in acute and chronic traumatic
events. Injury 45(Suppl 6):S98–s104 Benazzo F, Rossi SMP, Combi A, Meena S, Ghiara M (2016) Knee
replacement in chronic post-traumatic cases. EFORT Open Rev
1(5):211–218 Brockman BS, Maupin JJ, Thompson SF, Hollabaugh KM, Thakral
R (2020) Complication rates in total knee arthroplasty per-
formed for osteoarthritis and post-traumatic arthritis: a com-
parison study. J Arthroplast 35(2):371–374 Brophy RH, Gray BL, Nunley RM, Barrack RL, Clohisy JC (2014)
Total knee arthroplasty after previous knee surgery: expected
interval and the effect on patient age. J Bone Joint Surg Am
96(10):801–805 Buechel FF (2002) Knee arthroplasty in post-traumatic arthritis. J
Arthroplast 17(4 Suppl 1):63–68 Catani F, Digennaro V, Ensini A, Leardini A, Giannini S (2012)
Navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty in knees with osteo-
arthritis due to extra-articular deformity. Knee Surg Sports
Traumatol Arthrosc 20(3):546–551 Catonné Y, Khiami F, Sariali E, Ettori MA, Delattre O, Tillie B
(2019a) Same-stage total knee arthroplasty and osteotomy for
osteoarthritis with extra-articular deformity. Part II: femoral
osteotomy, prospective study of 6 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg
Res 105(6):1055–1060
Catonné Y, Sariali E, Khiami F, Rouvillain JL, Wajssz A, Pascal-
Moussellard H (2019b) Same-stage total knee arthroplasty and osteotomy for osteoarthritis with extra-articular deformity. Part I: Tibial osteotomy, prospective study of 26 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105(6):1047–1054
Demir B, Özkul B, Saygılı MS, Çetinkaya E, Akbulut D (2018)
Deformity correction with total knee arthroplasty for severe knee osteoarthritis accompanying extra-articular femoral defor­mity: the results are promising. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(11):3444–3451
Denjean S, Chatain F, Tayot O (2017) One-stage computer-assisted
total knee arthroplasty and tibial osteotomy. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 103(3):381–386
Dexel J, Beyer F, Lutzner C, Kleber C, Lutzner J (2016) TKA for
posttraumatic osteoarthritis is more complex and needs more surgical resources. Orthopedics 39(3 Suppl):S36–S40
Ge DH, Anoushiravani AA, Kester BS, Vigdorchik JM, Schwarzkopf
R (2018) Preoperative diagnosis can predict conversion total knee arthroplasty outcomes. J Arthroplast 33(1):124–129.e121
Houdek MT, Shannon SF, Watts CD, Wagner ER, Sems SA, Sierra
RJ (2015) Patella fractures prior to total knee arthroplasty: worse outcomes but equivalent survivorship. J Arthroplast 30(12):2167–2169
Houdek MT, Watts CD, Shannon SF, Wagner ER, Sems SA, Sierra
RJ (2016) Posttraumatic total knee arthroplasty continues to have worse outcome than total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthri­tis. J Arthroplast 31(1):118–123
Hudson J, Reddy VR, Krikler SJ (2003) Total knee arthroplasty for
neglected permanent post-traumatic patellar dislocation–case report. Knee 10(2):207–212
In Y, Kong CG, Sur YJ, Choi SS (2009) TKA using the subv-
astus approach and lateral retinacular release in patients with permanent post-traumatic patellar dislocation: a report of two cases. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17(3): 254–259
Kester BS, Minhas SV, Vigdorchik JM, Schwarzkopf R (2016) Total
knee arthroplasty for posttraumatic osteoarthritis: is it time for a new classication? J Arthroplasty 31(8):1649–1653.e1641
Konan S, Haddad FS (2016) Midterm outcome of avon patellofemo-
ral arthroplasty for posttraumatic unicompartmental osteoar­thritis. J Arthroplast 31(12):2657–2659
Kuo CC, Bosque J, Meehan JP, Jamali AA (2011) Computer-assisted
navigation of total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis in a patient with severe posttraumatic femoral deformity. J Arthroplast 26(6):976.e917–976.e920
Lahav A, DiMaio FR (2007) Concurrent opening wedge osteotomy
and total knee replacement in a patient with posttraumatic arthritis and a varus tibial malunion. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead, NJ) 36(8):E121–E123
Lahav A, Hofmann AA (2007) The "banana peel" exposure method
in revision total knee arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead, NJ) 36(10):526–529; discussion 529
Lizaur-Utrilla A, Collados-Maestre I, Miralles-Munoz FA, Lopez-
Prats FA (2015) Total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis sec­ondary to fracture of the tibial plateau. A prospective matched cohort study. J Arthroplast 30(8):1328–1332
Lonner JH, Pedlow FX, Siliski JM (1999) Total knee arthroplasty
for post-traumatic arthrosis. J Arthroplast 14(8):969–975
Lunebourg A, Parratte S, Gay A, Ollivier M, Garcia-Parra K,
Argenson JN (2015) Lower function, quality of life, and survival rate after total knee arthroplasty for posttraumatic arthritis than for primary arthritis. Acta Orthop 86(2):189–194
Lustig S, Parratte S, Magnussen RA, Argenson JN, Neyret P (2012)
Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty relieves pain and
66
https://t.me/medicina_free
C. T. Penrose and M. P. Bolognesi
improves function in posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop
Relat Res 470(1):69–76 Manzotti A, Chemello C, Pullen C, Cerveri P, Confalonieri N (2012)
Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty after prior femoral
fracture without hardware removal. Orthopedics 35(10
Suppl):34–39 Manzotti A, Pullen C, Cerveri P, Chemello C, Confalonieri N (2014)
Post traumatic knee arthritis: navigated total knee replacement
without hardware removal. Knee 21(1):290–294 Martin-Hernandez C, Floria-Arnal LJ, Gomez-Blasco A etal (2018)
Metaphyseal sleeves as the primary implant for the management
of bone defects in total knee arthroplasty after post-traumatic
knee arthritis. Knee 25(4):669–675 Pancio SI, Sousa PL, Krych AJ etal (2017) Increased risk of revision,
reoperation, and implant constraint in TKA after multiligament
6
knee surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475(6):1618–1626 Parratte S, Bonnevialle P, Pietu G, Saragaglia D, Cherrier B, Lafosse
JM (2011) Primary total knee arthroplasty in the management
of epiphyseal fracture around the knee. Orthop Traumatol Surg
Res 97(6 Suppl):S87–S94 Pinter Z, Jha AJ, McGee A etal (2020) Outcomes of knee replace-
ment in patients with posttraumatic arthritis due to previous
tibial plateau fracture. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol
30(2):323–328
Saini P, Trikha V (2016) Manipulation under anesthesia for post
traumatic stiff knee-pearls, pitfalls and risk factors for failure. Injury 47(10):2315–2319
Saleh H, Yu S, Vigdorchik J, Schwarzkopf R (2016) Total knee
arthroplasty for treatment of post-traumatic arthritis: system­atic review. World J Orthop 7(9):584–591
Scott CE, Davidson E, MacDonald DJ, White TO, Keating JF (2015)
Total knee arthroplasty following tibial plateau fracture: a matched cohort study. Bone Joint J 97-b(4):532–538
Sculco PK, Kahlenberg CA, Fragomen AT, Rozbruch SR (2019)
Management of extra-articular deformity in the setting of Total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 27(18):e819–e830
Wasserstein D, Henry P, Paterson JM, Kreder HJ, Jenkinson R
(2014) Risk of total knee arthroplasty after operatively treated tibial plateau fracture: a matched-population-based cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96(2):144–150
Weiss NG, Parvizi J, Hanssen AD, Trousdale RT, Lewallen DG
(2003a) Total knee arthroplasty in post-traumatic arthrosis of the knee. J Arthroplast 18(3 Suppl 1):23–26
Weiss NG, Parvizi J, Trousdale RT, Bryce RD, Lewallen DG (2003b)
Total knee arthroplasty in patients with a prior fracture of the tibial plateau. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(2):218–221
67
https://t.me/medicina_free
Post-Septic Arthritis
MatanOzery, IsaacSchultz, TejbirS.Pannu, JesusM.Villa, andCarlosA.Higuera
Contents
7.1 Introduction – 68
7.2 Denition andDiagnosis ofPost-Septic Arthritis – 68
7.3 Approach toSeptic Arthritis Depending ontheStage oftheJoint Disease – 69
7.3.1 Acute Septic Arthritis onaNative Knee andWithout Degenerative Disease – 69
7.3.2 Quiescent/Cured Septic Arthritis – 69
7.3.3 Evolutive Septic Arthritis withEnd Degenerative Disease – 70
7
7.4 Importance ofAntibiotic-Loaded Cement forTKA inPost-Septic Arthritis – 70
7.5 TKA inPost-Septic Arthritis – 71
7.5.1 Clinical Outcomes: One-Stage andTwo-Stage – 71
7.5.2 Complication andRevision Rates ofTKA – 72
7.6 Special Considerations forTKA inPost-Septic Arthritis – 72
References – 73
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 E. Hansen, K.-D. Kühn (eds.), Essentials of Cemented Knee Arthroplasty,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-63113-3_7
68
https://t.me/medicina_free
M. Ozery et al.
7.1 Introduction
erative joint disease after septic arthritis. As compared to the traditional arthrodesis, TKA can result in the fol-
Septic arthritis is a major cause of morbidity and mor-
lowing:
tality in the adult patient population. The incidence of septic bacterial arthritis is estimated to be around 0.7% of all hospital admissions (Donatto 1998), of which 40–50% are infections of the knee (Kelly 1975). The
5 Increased range of motion (ROM) 5 Improved pain 5 Better quality of life and function
mortality rates in patients who develop a septic joint range from 5% to 25% (Ferrand etal. 2016; Kaandorp et al. 1997), and there is a strong association between septic arthritis and poor functional clinical outcomes
> In a clinical setting, post-septic knee arthritis can
present either as an acute, quiescent, or evolutive infection.
(Kaandorp etal. 1997). Recently, a signicantly higher mortality rate has been reported in septic arthritis patients in the setting of infective endocarditis (Anis etal. 2020). Patients who have an underlying joint dis-
7
ease, or have undergone joint arthroplasty are 5–10 times more likely to develop an infection in their joint (Favero et al. 2008; Smith et al. 2006). The two most common ways that a knee becomes infected are through hematogenous spread or direct inoculation.
Hematogenous spread (septicemia/bacteremia) is the more common cause, and may be difcult to recognize in a patient who does not have an obvious underlying
It is imperative to choose the appropriate treatment option, and set goals with tailored treatment depending on these different scenarios, highlighting the importance of surgical decision-making based on the details of each individual case. In the current chapter, our objective is to review the literature on the management of septic knee with variable presentations and its associated clini­cal outcomes and the utility, efcacy, and safety of TKA in patients with native septic joint disease. We also briey discuss the development of periprosthetic joint infection in TKA after native septic arthritis treatment.
joint pathology (Kaandorp etal. 1997). Other risk fac­tors for joint infection include, among others, the fol­lowing:
7.2 Denition andDiagnosis ofPost-Septic
Arthritis
5 Either advanced or very young age 5 Diabetes mellitus 5 Skin infection 5 Endocarditis 5 Rheumatoid arthritis (Kaandorp etal. 1995)
The inammatory processes triggered by infection often lead to extensive articular tissue damage of the knee, damage which must be addressed through emergent treatment of the infection.
Treatment of the septic knee always includes an anti­biotic regimen, which is selected for the bacteria cul­tured from the joint or the most likely pathogen for the site (Mathews etal. 2010). The most common pathogen is Staphylococcus aureus, which may also be penicillin- resistant (Kaandorp etal. 1997). Depending on the type of infection (acute or chronic), the antibiotic regimen is mostly combined with a technique to remove the patho­genic tissue from the joint, whether through needle aspi­ration, irrigation, and debridement (I & D), or arthroscopy (Mathews etal. 2010). I & D can be done in one of the two ways: either arthroscopically or through open management via arthrotomy.
In cases in which the knee infection is unresolved for a prolonged period of time, joint degeneration ensues. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has emerged as the treat­ment of choice in these patients with end-stage degen-
Post-septic arthritis is dened as the arthritis which develops secondary to hematogenous seeding of a joint during a transient or persistent bacteremia (Goldenberg
1998). When bacteria enter the joint space, an acute
inammatory synovitis is triggered and the synovial membrane reacts with a proliferative lining-cell hyper­plasia (Goldenberg 1998). The lack of a basement mem­brane in synovial tissue allows for a rapid spread of microorganisms throughout the joint (Margaretten etal. 2007). An inux of acute and chronic inamma­tory cells leads to the release of inammatory factors which degrade the joint cartilage, and if untreated, within several days, irreversible subchondral bone loss can occur (Goldenberg 1998).
> Any microbial pathogen can cause septic arthritis;
however, Staphylococcus and Streptococcus are the most common infecting organisms (Klippel et al.
2001).
Most cases of septic arthritis are mono-articular and occur in large peripheral joints such as the knee, which accounts for 50% of cases (Goldenberg 1998; Klippel etal. 2001). Septic arthritis can be diagnosed through a positive synovial uid gram stain or culture, or by a pre­sumptive diagnosis through analysis of purulent syno-
Post-Septic Arthritis
https://t.me/medicina_free
69
7
vial uid with a leukocyte count (Klippel etal. 2001; Miller etal. 2018).
> A synovial uid aspiration with a leukocyte count
>50,000cells/mL is considered to be diagnostic of a
septic joint, however, lower counts do not exclude the
diagnosis (Miller etal. 2018).
Serum inammatory markers such as C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) might be use­ful to detect infection as well. The diagnosis of septic knee requires a strong clinical suspicion depending on the patient presentation, and physical examination, fur­ther supported by the results of synovial uid assay. Dif­ferential diagnosis includes gout exacerbation or pseudogout ares that can be differentiated using syno­vial uid crystal analysis of uric acid or calcium pyro­phosphate presence, respectively. Additionally, some inammatory arthropathies including rheumatoid arthritis can mimic a septic arthritis, however, in this condition the aspiration of synovial uid is generally aseptic.
7.3 Approach toSeptic Arthritis
Depending ontheStage oftheJoint Disease
In general, septic arthritis can present in three clinical settings as discussed below.
When comparing the short-term outcomes (e.g., bleed­ing, adverse events), arthroscopic I & D has shown favorable outcomes compared to open techniques. The literature is divided over infection recurrence and resto­ration of functional outcomes. While some authors have found no signicant difference between the two tech­niques, others have presented arthroscopic I & D to have more favorable outcomes than an open approach in these areas (Aïm et al. 2015; Faour etal. 2019; Johns et al. 2017). I & D is used as an ideally curative, less functionally limiting treatment for a native septic joint, however, if it does not successfully eradicate the infec­tion or if the joint damage progresses, then TKA, or in worst cases, arthrodesis or amputation may be necessary (Abram et al. 2020). Historically, I & D of the septic joint has demonstrated favorable outcomes with less soft tissue damage and invasiveness than the alternative treatments (Abram etal. 2020; Faour etal. 2019; Shukla etal. 2014), however, more recently it has been suggested that the failure rate of I & D is higher than previously realized.
7.3.2 Quiescent/Cured Septic Arthritis
This type of septic arthritis involves previous septic knee whose resolution is uncertain after a long asymptomatic period (Bauer et al. 2010). A history of septic knee arthritis often leads to long-term consequences which limit functional use of the joint, requiring further cor­rective treatment.
7.3.1 Acute Septic Arthritis onaNative
Knee andWithout Degenerative Disease
This scenario describes an acute infection of the joint, with no other preexisting pathology. The initial manage­ment often includes both joint irrigation and debride­ment and a course of postoperative antibiotics. However, in case of gonococcal arthritis, an appropriate antibiotic therapy sufces for majority of the cases. Initial hospi­talization is recommended until 1–2days after resolu­tion of symptoms. Follow-up synovial aspiration to conrm infection eradication is the key in management of gonococcal arthritis (Shirtliff and Mader 2002). If the patient does not respond to the initial treatment, fur­ther invasive management is indicated.
> I & D is a relatively efcacious initial surgical treat-
ment in these patients with acute infection of a native
knee (Abram et al. 2020). I & D can either be per-
formed arthroscopically or via open arthrotomy.
> Permanent joint damage occurs in 50% of cases of
septic arthritis of which the majority occurs in the knee (Goldenberg 1998; Kelly 1975).
Thus, the range of motion and function of the knee may progressively deteriorate. Also, the infective microor­ganism may still reside in quiescence in these cases (Bauer etal. 2010; Sultan etal. 2019). In both circum­stances, total knee arthroplasty may be indicated.
In case of quiescent infection, one-stage total knee arthroplasty with extensive synovectomy has been most commonly performed, as suggested by the literature (Bauer etal. 2010). Preoperative joint biopsy is manda­tory to screen for any quiescent infections, however, the false-negative rate for this procedure is high (Bauer etal.
2010). To conrm the presence of infection, intraopera-
tive synovial uid, tissue, and bone samples are recom­mended. (Bauer et al. 2010). The antibiotic therapy should then be adapted depending on these culture results (Bauer etal. 2010). These steps are key to prevent­ing prosthetic failure of the TKA in these post- septic cases where the infective status of the knee is unclear.
70
https://t.me/medicina_free
M. Ozery et al.
One-stage TKA begins with removal of all infected tissue and copious lavage of the remaining tissue, and often involves bone cuts. The wound is then packaged with sterile swabs and bandaged, as well as released from the tourniquet. The surgical team then re-scrubs, re-drapes, and gets a new set of instruments, and begins the second part of the procedure. The tourniquet is re­inated and the joint is prepared and the prosthesis is then implanted in the knee, completing the procedure (Bauer etal. 2010).
inserted. Depending on the culture sensitivity results, antibiotics should be selected and administered at least for 6weeks after the rst stage. For patients with nega­tive cultures, empiric, broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy should be considered.
The appropriate time for implantation is determined based on conrmation of the infection eradication. This is supported by the absence of clinical signs of infection, and gradually decreasing inammatory markers like ESR and CRP values. Before second stage, some advo­cate at least a 2-week antibiotic holiday. The second
> In one-stage TKA, it is important that the infective
organism is identied through aspiration prior to sur­gery, and organism-specic antibiotics are adminis­tered perioperatively and loaded in the cement of the
7
prosthesis (Parkinson etal. 2011).
stage includes repeated synovectomy and removal of the previously inserted antibiotic-loaded cement spacer (Bauer etal. 2010). Reconrmation of the infection res­olution is done intraoperatively. Tissue samples are obtained and sent for frozen sections to measure acute inammation evidenced by more than 5 neutrophils per
The amount of antibiotic mixed in the cement should not compromise its mechanical properties (Hinarejos etal. 2015).
high-powered eld in 5 power elds (Kwiecien et al.
2017). In the next step, the new prostheses are implanted
and re-debridement and irrigation are performed.
While TKA (one-stage or two-stage) is indicated in both quiescent and evolutive septic arthritis, the ques-
7.3.3 Evolutive Septic Arthritis withEnd
Degenerative Disease
tion has always risen about the safe timeline of perform­ing TKA after septic arthritis.
This type of arthritis results in severe damage to carti­lage and bone, eventually leading to functional deterio­ration of the knee (Bauer et al. 2010). A recent investigation dened this arthritis as the presence of one or more of the following criteria:
5 Clinical signs of infection (local erythema, tender-
ness, effusion, limited range of motion, or presence of a sinus)
5 Loss of articular space on radiographic studies 5 Femoral heads or articular cartilage damage 5 Inammatory markers (C-reactive protein
[CRP] > 10 mg/dL, erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]>30mm/h)
5 Intraoperative purulence 5 Positive synovial uid or tissue cultures at the time
of rst stage of antibiotic spacer placement, if appli­cable (Xu etal. 2019)
> In the setting of evolutive septic knee, two-stage total
knee arthroplasty has been the procedure of choice (Bauer etal. 2010; Xu etal. 2019).
The rst stage comprises total synovectomy with knee joint resection. The debridement of infected and necrotic tissue is performed. Synovial uid, deep tissue, and bone samples are obtained for cultures. Joint irrigation is done with 5–9L of an antiseptic solution. After this, an antibiotic-loaded articulating cement spacer is then
> Recent data suggest that while there is no ideal opti-
mal time point after treatment for septic arthritis for
TKA to be performed, it has been demonstrated that
waiting at least 1year is relatively safe (Sultan etal.
2019; Tan etal. 2019).
7.4 Importance ofAntibiotic-Loaded
Cement forTKA inPost-Septic Arthritis
In both the one-stage and two-stage approaches to post­septic TKA, when implanting the prosthesis, antibiotic­loaded bone cement (ALBC) is commonly used. In ALBC, the antibiotic elutes through pores in the cement to eradicate intra-articular organisms and prevent pros­thetic infection (Hinarejos etal. 2015). Commonly, ami­noglycosides and vancomycin are used to treat gram-negative and gram-positive species, respectively (Hinarejos etal. 2015). Although high-dose formulation ALBC has been used for a long time for infection pro­phylaxis, there are many shortcomings, especially with cemented TKA:
5 First, there is an inverse relationship between the
amount of antibiotic infused with the cement and
the compressive and tensile strength of it (Hinarejos
etal. 2015). For the antibiotic to elute the cement, a
certain degree of porosity is required, and this
increase in porosity weakens the mechanical strength
Post-Septic Arthritis
https://t.me/medicina_free
71
7
of the cement, ultimately decreasing the longevity of the joint xation (Hinarejos etal. 2015).
5 Second, the antibiotic can leave the joint and can be
detected systemically, leading to side effects of the specic antibiotic, hypersensitivity reactions, and antibiotic resistance development because of the slow release, exposing the infecting organism to initially insufcient levels of antibiotic (Hinarejos etal. 2015)
> In general, considering the high-risk prole of post-
septic arthritis cases, the use of ALBC in TKA is rec­ommended in all cases.
There are multiple commercial premixed ALBCs avail­able (Jiranek etal. 2006). The majority of them are com­posed of aminoglycosides in combination with either tobramycin or gentamicin. The major limitation of these commercial ALBCs is the inability to tailor antibi­otics for specic organisms. Thus, surgeons still continue to hand-mix antibiotics to the cement in order to target a particular infecting organism. There is no evidence comparing commercially premixed and hand- mixed cement as such in the setting of post-septic arthritis. However, some evidence on this subject comes from the management of periprosthetic joint infection. Chang etal. (2013) tested the following two premixed ALBCs against hand-mixed ALBCs:
5 Palacos R+G: 1g gentamicin in 40g polymethyl-
methacrylate (PMMA)
5 Simplex P: 1g tobramycin in 40g PMMA
While gentamicin-loaded premixed ALBC showed an equal or longer duration of antibacterial action against different bacteria, tobramycin-loaded premixed ABLC did not show any advantage over hand-mixed ABLC (Chang etal. 2013).
7.5 TKA inPost-Septic Arthritis
7.5.1 Clinical Outcomes: One-Stage
andTwo-Stage
7.5.1.1 One-Stage TKA
Multiple previous reports have shown benets of one­stage TKA in septic arthritis patients with previous his­tory of sepsis which was considered resolved (Bauer etal. 2010; Lee etal. 2002). Bauer etal. demonstrated the eradication of joint infection in 95% of quiescent septic arthritis patients who underwent one-stage arthroplasty. These favorable outcomes were also reected in the mean postoperative International Knee Score (IKS) of 91/100 and the mean postoperative IKS
functional score of 80/100 (Bauer etal.
2010). On treat-
ing 18 out of 20 patients with previous sepsis around the knee with one-stage TKA, Lee etal. showed an improve­ment in the mean Knee Society scores for pain from 39 points preoperatively to 91 points postoperatively (Lee etal. 2002).
> While these reports show favorable outcomes with the
one-stage approach in quiescent septic arthritis, a high rate of PJI after arthroplasty was found in a recent investigation of 62 native knees with quiescent infection which were managed using this approach (Seo etal. 2014).
At a mean follow-up of 6.1years, as much as 9.7% (6/62) of these cases developed infection. Interestingly, organ­isms similar to those cultured previously regrew at the time of re-infection (Seo etal. 2014). Thus, more recent studies have considered two-stage arthroplasty in these patients as a rewarding alternative (Anagnostakos etal.
2016; Fleck etal. 2011; Xu etal. 2019).
7.5.1.2 Two-Stage TKA
> Two-stage arthroplasty has been a preferred proce-
dure in the setting of evolutive septic arthritis in old investigations (Bauer etal. 2010). However, as men­tioned before, this approach is also now considered as a substitute for quiescent septic arthritis.
In terms of clinical outcomes, the Knee Society (KS) score (Jenny and Diesinger 2011) has been used in the literature as an indicator of clinical function. Nazarian et al. (2003) studied 14 knees with recurrent septic arthritis or chronic periarticular osteomyelitis in which a two-stage approach was used (Nazarian etal. 2003). With this approach, average Knee Society scores mark­edly improved from the preoperative (46) to the postop­erative period (89). In the same cohort, the postoperative average knee functional score was determined to be 78 (Nazarian et al. 2003). Alike results were reported by Bauer etal. (2010) using a two-stage TKA to treat septic arthritis (Knee Society Pain scores and Knee Society Function scores: both 80 out of 100) (Bauer etal. 2010).
Depending on the stage of organism growth cycle, quiescent infections have been shown to achieve better clinical outcomes, as compared to evolutive infections (Bauer etal. 2010). Two-stage approaches using articu­lating cement spacers molded intraoperatively for infected knees have been associated with favorable post­operative clinical outcomes. The mean Knee Society Pain and mean Knee Society Function scores exhibited an improvement from preoperative 41 and 43 to postop­erative 85 and 83, respectively, at the latest follow-up (Shaikh etal. 2014). Clinical outcomes for TKA using impregnated cement spacers in post-septic arthritis have