Aims. Tissue adhesives (TAs) are a commonly used adjunct to traditional surgical wound closures. However, TAs must be allowed to dry before application of a surgical dressing, increasing operating time and reducing intraoperative efficiency. The goal of this study is to identify a practical method for decreasing the curing time for TAs. Methods. Six techniques were tested to determine which one resulted in the quickest drying time for 2-octyle cyanoacrylate (Dermabond) skin adhesive. These were nothing (control), fanning with a hand (Fanning), covering with a hand (Covering), bringing operating room lights close (OR Lights), ultraviolet lights (UV Light), or prewarming the TA applicator in a hot water bath (Hot Water Bath). Equal amounts of TA were applied to a reproducible plexiglass surface and allowed to dry while undergoing one of the six techniques. The time to complete dryness was recorded for ten specimens for each of the six techniques. Results. Use of the Covering, OR Lights, and Hot Water Bath techniques were associated with a 25- (p = 0.042), 27- (p = 0.023), and 30-second (p = 0.009) reduction in drying time, respectively, when compared to controls. The UV Light (p = 0.404) and Fanning (p = 1.000) methods had no effect on drying time. Conclusion. Use of the Covering, OR Lights, and Hot Water Bath techniques present a means for reducing overall operating time for surgeons using TA for closure augmentation, which can increase intraoperative efficiency. Further studies are needed to validate this in vivo. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):607–610

Introduction. Primary wound closure in open tibial fractures has not been recommended. Traditionally initial debridement with fracture stabilisation and delayed wound closure was the accepted treatment. However this practice was developed before the use of prophylactic intravenous antibiotics and improved techniques for fracture stabilisation. Studies suggest that infections are not caused by the initial contamination but the organisms acquired in the hospital. Subsequent primary wound closure after adequate wound care and fracture stabilisation should be a safe concept and should not increase the rate of complications. Material/methods. In a retrospective study we analysed 95 patients with open tibial fractures Gustilo-Anderson Type 1-3a treated at two different teaching hospitals with primary fracture stabilisation and delayed wound closure as group I and primary fracture stabilisation and primary wound closure as group II. Exclusion criteria to the study were the following conditions: Grade 3b and 3c fractures, polytrauma, other fractures, significant medical history, previous surgery 6 months prior to admission. In group I 46 patients (38 males, 8 females) with a mean age of 30.2 years (16-56) were included. 19 sustained Grade 1 open, 16 Grade 2 open, 4 Grade 3a open and 7 gunshot fractures to the shaft of the tibia. In group II 49 patients (36 males, 13 females) with a mean age of 33.4 (18-69) were included. 19 sustained Grade 1 open, 19 Grade 2 open, 3 Grade 3a open and 8 gunshot fractures. The mean follow-up in group 1 was 11.5 (9-18) and 11.7 (8-16) months. The criteria for post-operative infection were clinical/radiological. Results. The mean operating time in group 1 was 96 (45-180) minutes, in group II 101 (40-170) minutes. The hospital stay in group 1 was 8.6 (3-20) days and in group 2 15.4 (4-52) days. One infectious case in group 1 was seen (2%) and two cases in group 2 (4.3%) were found. On further analysis one case in group 2 in our opinion should not have been treated with primary fixation and wound closure. He only had 3 doses of a first generation cephalosporin and was operated 20 hrs after admission to hospital. The corrected sepsis rate in group 2 should therefore should be calculated without that case and then is 2.1%. Discussion. Our results support recent findings that primary wound closure after thorough debridement in Grade 1+2 open fractures does not increase the infection rate in comparison to the standard treatment. It shortens hospital stay and is cost effective treatment. We conclude that primary wound closure is safe. Prospective multicentre studies are needed to further evaluate and result in change of the current practice

Several disadvantages can be attributed to suture knots in wound closure: they are tedious to tie, may be a nidus for infection and can strangulate tissue. They may extrude through skin weeks after surgery. Additional needle manipulations during knot-tying may predispose to glove perforation. A self-anchoring barbed suture has been developed that requires no knots (or slack suture management) for wound closure. The elimination of knot tying has demonstrated some advantages over conventional wound closure methods. It has demonstrated comparable efficacy for the long term closure of C section wounds. The lack of bulk afforded by the knotless suture proves useful in mid face lift applications where knots are a drawback to traditional suture use and cosmesis is of primary importance. This type of suture has demonstrated improved “water tightness” in knee arthrotomy closure compared to a standard interrupted suture technique in a cadaver model, has demonstrated reduced time for total surgery by 10% and time for closure by 33%. Use of this suture has been shown to be safe and effective in many other surgical specialties, while proving easier and faster than traditional suturing technique. Its use is highly recommended

Wound closure is typically not the surgeon's favorite part of the case. It is critical, however, for preventing infection, avoiding early re-operation and is the portion of the procedure that is most directly visible to the patient. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of bidirectional, barbed suture for wound closure in primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA) to determine whether its use is safe, cosmetic and associated with time savings when compared with traditional suture. We carried out a blinded, randomised controlled trial comparing bidirectional, barbed suture (Quill™ SRS; Angiotech Pharmaceuticals) and a traditional absorbable layered closure following primary THA and TKA. We randomised 20 THAs (10 Quill; 10 traditional) and 31 TKAs (16 Quill; 15 traditional). Power analysis determined that a minimum of 23 patients per arm of the study were required to show a significant difference in closure times using an alpha of 0.05 and a beta of 0.80. Wound closure in the Quill group was significantly faster than traditional suture by a mean of 4.1 minutes (9.2 vs. 13.2 minutes; p = 0.0005). Traditional closure required a mean 5.6 sutures, compared to a mean 2.7 sutures (p < 0.0001). The unit cost of the barbed suture was 5–12 times that of conventional suture. One patient who had undergone Quill closure developed a superficial reaction that was managed non-operatively. Our results have been confirmed by a similar recently published randomised study by Gilland et al, who showed a mean reduction in closure time of 4.7 minutes. However, these authors concluded that overall costs were lower with a barbed suture based on a reduction in operative times. This method of closure has also been shown to provide a stronger and more water-tight closure than traditional interrupted sutures

Aim. Wound leakage has been shown to increase the risk of prostetic joint infections (PJIs) in primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (unicondylar and total knee arthroplasty; KA). The aim of this study is to determine whether the addition of a continuous subcuticular bonding stitch to a conventional 3-layer closure method reduces the incidence of prolonged wound leakage and PJIs after THA and KA. Method. This retrospective cohort study included all patients receiving a THA or KA. Patients in the control group with a 3-layer closure method had surgery between November 1. st. 2015 and 2016, and were compared to the study group with a 4-layer closure method that had surgery between January 1. st. 2017 and 2018. The primary outcome was incidence of prolonged wound leakage longer than 72 hours. Differences were evaluated using logistic regression. Incidence of PJIs was the secondary outcome. Results. A total of 439 THA and 339 KA in the control group and 460 THA and 350 KA in the study group were included. In the control group 11.7% of the patients had a prolonged leaking wound compared to 1.9% in the study group (p<0.001). The modified wound closure method showed a protective effect for obtaining prolonged wound leakage; odds ratios were 0.09 (95%CI 0.04–0.22; p<0.001) for THA and 0.21 (95%CI 0.10–0.43; p<0.001) for KA. PJIs decreased from 1.54% to 0.37% (p=0.019). Conclusions. The addition of a continuous subcuticular bonding stitch reduces the incidence of prolonged wound leakage and PJIs after THA and KA compared to a conventional 3-layer wound closure method. The large reduction of incidence in wound leakage and PJIs in this study, combined with relatively negligible cost and effort of the modified wound closure method, would advocate for implementing this wound closure method in arthroplasty

Introduction. Skin closure methods are various in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Subcuticular skin closure techniques, which do not require postoperative stitch removal, are considered to be useful for excellent cosmesis and patients' satisfaction. Basically, subcuticular skin closure provides the tightness and water-tight seal, which leads to loss of postoperative normal physiologic drainage. As a routine wound closure, we performed the subcuticular skin closure with use of absorbable sutures or barbed sutures without staples. According to some previous reports, subcuticular skin closure using barbed sutures resulted in worse clinical outcomes, comparing with conventional skin staples. However, little attention has been paid to the differences between conventional absorbable and barbed sutures in both capsular and subcuticular skin closures. Our purpose was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the barbed suture, comparing to conventional absorbable sutures in TKA. Methods. A total of 81 knees in 75 patients (60 females and 15 males) were enrolled in the current investigation. Mean age was 73 (58–89) years old. All the subjects underwent unilateral or staged bilateral TKA using Balanced Knee System, posterior stabilized design (Ortho Development, Draper, UT). All knees were divided into two groups, as presented in Table 1. In conventional group, capsule was repaired using interrupted number 1 braided absorbable sutures, followed by closure of subdermal layer using a 3-0 monofilament absorbable suture with inverted interrupted knots. Thereafter, subcuticular skin closure was done using 4-0 monofilament absorbable suture, followed by adhesive tape. On the other hand, in barbed suture group, 1-0 and 4-0 unidirectional barbed suture (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) was used for capsule and subcuticular skin closure, respectively. Drains were removed on postoperative day 2. We evaluated closure time from capsule to skin, range of motion (ROM), Hollander Wound Evaluation Score (HWES: maximum score 6/6), and complications. Postoperative ROM and HWES were evaluated on postoperative day 14. As a statistical analysis, the data was compared between groups using Mann-Whitney U-test and Fisher exact probability test. P-values of < 0.05 were considered as significant. Results. 20 knees were allocated to conventional group and 61 knees were allocated to barbed suture group. Preoperative patients' demographics were seen in Table 2. No significant differences were found between groups preoperatively. In terms of clinical results, surgical closure time was significantly fast in barbed suture group, while postoperative range of motion and HWES were not significantly different between groups. In each group, wound related complication was not found. Discussion. According to previous reports, V-Loc provided worse clinical outcomes in wound related complications. However, in the current investigation, barbed suture was safe in wound cosmesis and effective in surgical closure time, comparing to conventional closure. We considered that barbed suture would be safe and effective as a closure method in TKA

Obtaining primary wound healing in Total Joint Arthroplasty (TJA) is essential to a good result. Wound healing problems can occur and the consequences can be devastating to the patient and to the surgeon. Determination of the host healing capacity can be useful in predicting complications. Cierney and Mader classified patients as Type A: no healing compromises and Type B: systemic or local healing compromises factors present. Local factors include traumatic arthritis with multiple previous incisions, extensive scarring, lymphedema, poor vascular perfusion, and excessive local adipose deposition. Systemic compromising factors include diabetes, rheumatic diseases, renal or liver disease, immune compromise, steroids, smoking, and poor nutrition. In high risk situations the surgeon should encourage positive patient choices such as smoking cessation and nutritional supplementation to elevate the total lymphocyte count and total albumin.

Careful planning of incisions, particularly in patients with scarring or multiple previous operations, is productive. Around the knee the vascular viability is better in the medial flap. Thus, use the most lateral previous incision, do minimal undermining, and handle tissue meticulously. We do all potentially complicated TKAs without tourniquet to enhance blood flow and tissue viability. The use of perioperative anticoagulation will increase wound problems.

If wound drainage or healing problems do occur immediate action is required. Deep sepsis can be ruled out with a joint aspiration and cell count, and negative culture and sensitivity. All hematomas should be evacuated and necrosis or dehiscence should be managed by debridement to obtain a live wound. Options available for coverage of complex wound problems include myocutaneous flaps, pedicled skin flaps, and skin grafts. Wet, occlusive dressings and wound VACs encourage epithelisation of chronic wounds.

Open tibia fractures are common injuries in our paediatric population and are often associated with high-energy trauma such as pedestrian-vehicle accidents. At our institution, these injuries are routinely treated with debridement and mono-lateral external fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of open tibia fractures treated according to this protocol, as well as the complication rate and factors contributing to the development of complications. We performed a retrospective folder review of all patients with open tibia fractures that were treated according to our protocol from 2015–2019. Patients treated by other means, who received primary treatment elsewhere, and with insufficient data, were excluded. Data was collected on presenting demographics, injury characteristics, management, and clinical course. Complications were defined as pin tract infections, delayed- or non-union, malunion, growth arrest, and neurovascular injury. Appropriate statistical analysis was performed. One-hundred-and-fifteen fractures in 114 children (82 males) with a median age of 7 years (IQR 6–9) were included in the analysis. Pedestrian vehicle accidents (PVA's) accounted for 101 (88%) of fractures, and the tibial diaphysis was affected in 74 cases (64%). Fracture severity was equally distributed among the Gustillo-Anderson grades. The median Abbreviated Injury Score was 4 (IQR 4;5). Ninety-five fractures (83%) progressed to uneventful union within 7 weeks. Twenty patients (17%) developed complications, with delayed union and fracture site infections being the most common complications. Gustillo-Anderson Grade 3 fractures, an increased Abbreviated Injury Score, and the need for advanced wound closure techniques were risk factors for developing complications. Surgical debridement and external fixation in a simple mono-lateral frame is an effective treatment for open tibia fractures in children and good outcomes were seen in 83% of patients. More severe injuries requiring advanced wound closure were associated with the development of complications

Aim. There are no studies in literature that analyze the effectiveness of closed-incisional negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) in the treatment of bone and joint infections (BJI). The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of the application of ciNPWT in the postsurgical wound management of patients with osteoarticular infections. Method. We conducted a perspective single-center study on patients with BJI treated between 01/2022 and 10/2022 with ciNPWT dressing application at the end of the surgical procedure. All patients were treated by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach and operated by the same surgical equipe. Inclusion criteria were: presence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), fracture-related infection (FRI), osteomyelitis (OM), septic arthritis (SA) surgically treated, after which ciNPTW was applied over the closed surgical wound. 30 patients (19M, 11F) have been analyzed with mean age of 56,10±17,11 years old; BJIs were all localized in the lower limb (16 PJI, 12 FRI, 1 SA, 1 OM). Results. We considered the following clinical local pre-operative parameters: presence of fistula (10 patients, 33,33%), presence of erythema (18 patients, 60%), presence of previous flap in the incisional site (7 patients, 23,33%). In 11 cases (36,67%) more than 3 previous surgical procedures were performed in the surgical site. The following surgical procedures were performed: 8 debridement and implants removal, 7 DAIR, 3 one-stage exchange, 6 two-stage exchange, 3 spacer exchange, 3 resection arthroplasty. Nineteen patients (63,34%) showed no occurrence of any local post-operative complication (erythema, hematoma, wound breakdown, wound blister, necrosis). Seven (23,33%) patients showed the presence of one or more postoperative complications that didn't require additional surgery. We observed four (13,33%) failures, defined as the need for further surgical procedures following the onset of a local complication: two patients had a wound breakdown before wound closure and two had a recurrence of infection after an uneventfully wound closure. All failures were within the group of joint infection (PJI+SA) and were affected by a multi drug resistant pathogen. Conclusions. In our series four patients required further surgery, but only two cases were related to incisional wound problems, that is consistent with aseptic joint revision surgeries data that are available in literature (3.4%-6.9%)[1-2]. Patients affected by BJI are a group with significant high risk of failure and therefore the use of ciNPWT should be considered. However, randomized clinical trials are needed to establish the superiority of the ciNPWT dressing over the standard one

Surgical site infections constitute the cause of 13% to 18% of readmissions within 90 days of a total hip arthroplasty and are a leading cause of failure of revision total knee arthroplasty. The goals of wound closure are to enhance healing potential, prevent infection, and provide a cosmetic appearance. Traditionally, this has been achieved with the use of interrupted sutures. However, recently “barbed” sutures have been introduced which consist of a solid core with peripheral etched barbs in a helical array. These sutures have been used for both the deep and superficial layers of wound closure in a running fashion with the barbs intended to be self-retaining in the event that the suture is cut or pulls out of the tissue. Proposed advantages include the avoidance of knots, less needles required, improved efficiency, and creation of a “watertight” seal. Numerous studies have shown decreased times for wound closure with the use of barbed vs. interrupted sutures with no difference in infection or complication rates. With less needles and improved efficiency, there is the potential for cost savings with the use of barbed sutures. However, there have been two studies raising concerns of arthrotomy failure with their use in total knee arthroplasty. In addition, several reports have noted the potential for increased superficial wound complications when barbed sutures are used for a subcutaneous closure. Therefore, what remains clear is that there is no proven, optimal method of wound closure in total joint arthroplasty and that every closure method remains technique dependent

Wound closure is not often an area that is discussed by orthopaedic surgeons. We commonly attend meetings and talks related to different types of implants and surgical technique but in reality the wound and how we close it maybe one of the most important aspects of a surgical procedure. The avoidance of wound complications such as unplanned clinic visits, readmissions, reoperations and deep infections are very important as we move into a world of bundled payments and public reporting of complications. Not to mention the poor results for the patients when wound complications occur. Often there is little thought about how wound closure and surgical dressings could affect surgical site healing. We all have a common belief that blisters, drainage and surgical site infections are rare. In the literature it has been shown that the method of wound closure can influence skin and soft tissue perfusion. Which closure techniques can achieve physiologic blood flow, which may improve wound healing? This talk will cover topics related to reducing the dead space, avoidance of hematoma formation and what the literature says regarding different types of wound closure materials

Sternoclavicular joint infections are uncommon but severe and complex condition usually in medically complex and compromised hosts. These infections are challenging to treat with risks of infection extending into the mediastinal structures and surgical drainage is often faced with problems of multiple unplanned returns to theatre, chronic non-healing wounds that turn into sinus and the risk of significant clinical escalation and death. Percutaneous aspirations or small incision drainage often provide inadequate drainage and failed control of infection, while open drainage and washout require multidisciplinary support, due to the close proximity of the mediastinal structures and the great vessels as well as failure to heal the wounds and creation of chronic wound or sinus. We present our series of 8 cases over 6 years where we used the plan of open debridement of the Sternoclavicular joint with medial end of clavicle excision to allow adequate drainage. The surgical incision was not closed primarily, and a suction vacuum dressing was applied until the infection was contained on clinical and laboratory parameters. After the infection was deemed contained, the surgical incision was closed by local muscle flap by transferring the medial upper sternal head of the Pectoralis Major muscle to fill in the sternoclavicular joint defect. This technique provided a consistent and reliable way to overcome the infection and have the wound definitively closed that required no secondary procedures after the flap surgery and no recurrence of infections so far. We suggest that open and adequate drainage of Sternoclavicular joint staged with vacuum dressing followed by pectoralis major local flap is a reliable technique for achieving control of infection and wound closure for these challenging infections

The Versajet Hydrosurgery system (Smith & Nephew) offers a unique way of performing debridement using a high pressure fluid jet parallel to the surface to draw devitalised soft tissues into a cutting chamber for excision and evacuation. Purpose. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of the Versajet Hydrosurgery system in the treatment of Gustilo and Anderson grade III A and III B open tibial fractures using a pilot scale prospective randomised controlled trial against conventional surgery. The primary variable was the total number of debridements until wound closure. Results. A total of 40 patients were recruited: 16 patients had Versajet Plus (Smith & Nephew) hydrosurgery and 24 patients standard surgical debridement. Baseline characteristics were well balanced with respect to the age, mechanism of injury, contamination, wound area, depth, and displacement of the bone. There was some imbalance between treatment groups where more (68.8%) Versajet patients had III A classification; vs. (37.5%) standard surgical debridement patients. The numbers of debridement procedures before wound closure for Versajet were: 1 debridement procedure for 11 patients (69%), 2 for 3 patients (19%) and 3 for 2 patients (12.5%). For standard surgical patients: 1 debridement procedure for 1 patient (4.3%), 2 for 19 patients (83%) and 3 for 3 patients (13%). There was significant evidence (p<0.001) that Versajet patients required fewer debridement procedures than standard surgical debridement prior to wound closure (ratio Standard: Versajet = 1.747:1). There was no evidence that the number of debridement procedures to achieve wound closure differed between the Gustilo and Anderson grade IIIA and grade IIIB classifications (p=0.692). The median time to wound closure was 3 days (95% CI 3 days, 5 days) for Versajet and 5 days (95% CI 4 days, 8 days) for standard surgically debrided wounds, but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.275). There was no evidence (p=0.397) of a difference in the total number of surgical sessions (debridement or debridement with closure) required to close the wound (ratio Standard: Versajet = 1.040; 95% CI (0.950, 1.137). There were no instances of post-operative infection. Conclusion. This pilot study has shown that on average only a single Versajet Plus hydrosurgery debridement is needed before IIIA or IIIB wounds are ready for closure and there is a trend (not significant) towards the possibility of earlier closure following the use of Versajet compared with standard surgery

Aim. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication after total joint arthroplasty. To prevent PJI, strict infection prevention measures are followed in combination with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP). To date, scientific reports concerning the optimal duration of SAP in revision arthroplasty are scarce. The aim of this multicenter open-label, randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands, is to investigate the superiority of 5 days (extended) versus a single dose of cefazolin to prevent PJI within the first year after revision arthroplasty of the hip and knee. Method. Included patients with an assumed aseptic hip or knee revision procedure received a single dose of 2 or 3 gram cefazolin preoperatively. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive extended prophylaxis of cefazolin during 5 days postoperatively versus no prophylaxis after wound closure. Patients were excluded if evidence of PJI at revision. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PJI within one year after revision arthroplasty. PJI was defined according to the 2018 Philadelphia consensus criteria. With a sample size of 746 patients, an alpha of 5% and a power of 80%, superiority of the extended regimen would be shown if the lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the absolute between-group difference of the percentage of PJI is below −4%. Results. In total 751 patients were included for analysis: 379 in the single dose cefazolin group and 372 in the extended group. Within one year, PJI occurred in 2.6% (10/379) in the single dose group and 2.4% (9/372) in the extended group (risk difference, −0.2 percentage points; 95% CI, −2.5 to 2.0%), thus superiority was not shown. Adverse drug events were seen in 20 cases with extended and 7 cases with a single dose prophylaxis. Conclusions. Extended prophylaxis is not significantly superior to a single dose of cefazolin to prevent PJI within the first year after revision arthroplasty of the hip or knee. This is the first randomized controlled trail in which the duration of SAP in the selected group of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty was studied. Extending SAP after closure of the wound could increase the selection or induction of antimicrobial resistance, has an increased risk for adverse drug events, and is therefore not in line with the primary goal of antimicrobial stewardship, comprising optimizing clinical outcomes and ensuring cost-effective therapy while minimizing unintended consequences of antimicrobial use

Aim. Pelvic osteomyelitis following pressure ulceration results in substantial patient morbidity. Previous studies have reported a heterogenous approach to diagnosis and medical management by physicians, suggesting equipoise on key clinical questions. This study hypothesised that the same equipoise exists amongst Orthopaedic surgeons. Method. An 18-question multiple-choice questionnaire was designed through an iterative feedback process until the final version was agreed by all authors. Likert-type scale responses were used with graded responses (e.g., never/fewer than half of patients/around half of patients/more than half of patients/every patient). The online survey was sent to members of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and the ESCMID Study Group for Implant-Associated Infections (ESGIAI). No incentive for participation was provided. Results. Amongst respondents, 22/41 were based in Europe and 10/41 from the USA. The majority (29/41) had been in clinical practice between 5—24 years. There was a high priority placed on bone biopsy histology, culture-positive bone sampling, and palpable bone without periosteal covering for diagnosis. Multidisciplinary team approach with plastic surgery involvement at the index procedure was advocated. The strongest indications for surgical intervention were source control for sepsis, presence of an abscess/collection, and prevention of local osteomyelitis progression. Physiological/psychological optimisation and control of acute infection were the primary determinants of surgical timing. There was low utilisation of adjunctive surgical therapies. Local/regional primary tissue transfer or secondary healing with/without VAC were the preferred techniques for wound closure. Recurrent osteomyelitis was the most common reason for prolonged antimicrobial therapy. The majority received bedside advice from an infectious disease-specialist but a quarter of respondents preferred telephone advice. Conclusions. Amongst an international cohort of Orthopaedic Surgeons there was a heterogenous diagnostic and therapeutic approach to pressure-related pelvic osteomyelitis

Aim. This retrospective study evaluated the outcome of treatment for unhealed fracture-related infections (FRI). Methods. We identified a consecutive, single-centre cohort of patients having treatment for an FRI Consensus confirmed FRI. All fractures were unhealed at the time of treatment. Patients were followed up for at least one year. Successful outcome was a healed fracture without recurrent infection. Lack of union, persistent infection and/or unplanned reoperation defined failure. Results. Demographics: 183 patients (184 FRIs) with mean age 52.1 years (range 17-96) were treated and followed up for a mean of 2.8 years (range 1-9.4). Mean duration of FRI was 1.1 years with 65 (35.5 %) presenting within 6 months of injury. 118 patients had established infected non-union. FRI was most frequent in the tibia (74), femur (48) and humerus (24). 171 patients were BACH Complex. 75.5% of FRIs were culture positive, with Staph. aureus being the most frequent organism. Polymicrobial infection and Gram negative cultures were common (25.5% and 33.6%). Treatment: 98.3% of surgeries were performed in one stage with just 3 planned 2-stage procedures (2 endoprosthetic replacements and 1 free fibular flap). No bone graft was used in any surgery and all wounds were closed at first operation. 48 cases (26%) required flap coverage (29 free flaps and 19 local flaps). Local antibiotics were used in 124 cases (67.4%) of primary surgeries. All patients had sampling, debridement, systemic antibiotics and wound closure. 40 (21.7%) had DAIR, 31 (16.8%) had new internal fixation and 105 (57.1%) had external fixation (including 79 Ilizarov fixators). Outcomes: After primary surgery, 84.6% of all patients were infection-free and 77.2% had united. After further surgery, 98.8% were infection-free and 98.1% had united. External fixation techniques achieved infection eradication in 89.1% compared to 71.7% with any internal fixation (p=0.005). Primary internal fixation achieved union in 81.7% compared to 74.3% with external fixation (p=0.27). Secondary surgery after external fixation was mainly docking site fixation. Conclusion. Unhealed FRIs present a difficult challenge for treatment. This large series demonstrated that single-stage treatment, without bone grafting, gave acceptable results with few reoperations. Primary external fixation gave more certainty of infection eradication but required more reoperations to secure union. However, this difference in reoperation was not statistically significant. We strongly advocate managing these patients with a multidisciplinary team which can treat all aspects of the condition

Aim. Antibiotic prophylaxis is central in preventing postoperative spine infections, yet knowledge of clinical spine tissue antibiotic concentrations remains limited. Pooled postoperative spine infection rates are constant (approximately 3%), resulting in severe patient morbidity, mortality, and prolonged hospitalization. Current antibiotic dosing regimens often involve fixed doses based on empirical knowledge, surrogate measures (plasma samples), non-clinical evidence (experimental models), and inferior methodology (tissue specimens). Therefore, personalized antibiotic dosing may be the future of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent postoperative infections, especially implant infections. The aim was to continuously evaluate intra- and postoperative cefuroxime target spine tissue concentrations in long-lasting spine surgery after personalized dosing by repeated weight-dosed intravenous administrations. Method. Twenty patients (15 female, 5 male) scheduled for long-lasting spine deformity surgery with hypotensive anaesthesia were included; median age (range): 17.5 years (12-74), mean BMI (range): 22.2 (16.2-37.7), and mean surgery time (range): 4h 49min (3h 57min-6h 9min). Weight-dosed cefuroxime (20 mg/kg) was administered intravenously to all patients on average 25 min before incision and repeated after 4 hours. Microdialysis catheters were placed for sampling of cefuroxime concentrations in vertebral bone (only intraoperative sampling), paravertebral muscle, and subcutaneous tissue as soon as possible after surgery start. Upon wound closure, two additional catheters were placed in the profound and superficial part of the wound. Microdialysis and plasma samples were obtained continuously intra- and postoperative for up to 12 hours. The primary endpoint was (based on cefuroxime time-dependent efficacy) the time with cefuroxime concentrations above the clinical breakpoint minimal inhibitory concentration for Staphylococcus aureus of 4 µg/mL in percentage (%fT>MIC4) of. (a). patients’ individual surgery time,. (b). first dosing interval (0-4 hours),. (c). second dosing interval (4-12 hours). Results. Mean cefuroxime %fT>MIC4 (range) of:. (a). patients’ individual surgery time was 100% (100-100%) in all investigated tissues. (b). the first dosing interval was 93% (93-93%) in vertebral bone, paravertebral muscle, subcutaneous tissue, and 99% (99-100%) in plasma. (c). the second dosing interval was 87% (52-100%) in paravertebral muscle, 89% (52-100%) in subcutaneous tissue, 91% (71-100%) in the profound wound, 94% (72-100%) in the superficial wound, and 71% (42-100%) in plasma. Conclusions. Personalized cefuroxime dosing by repeated weight-dosed (20 mg/kg) intravenous administrations provided homogenous and therapeutic spine tissue exposure across all investigated tissues and plasma in long-lasting spine surgery with hypotensive anaesthesia (up to 11 hours). Thus, personalized cefuroxime dosing may decrease the risk of postoperative spine infection, especially in cases with implant insertion

Aim. Fracture-related infection (FRI) is one of the most serious complications in orthopedic trauma surgery [1]. The role of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) remains controversial in the management pathway of FRI [2]. Currently, as scientific evidence is lacking, most recommendations for NPWT with respect to the treatment of FRI are based on expert opinion [3]. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of NPWT and its duration on recurrence of infection in operatively treated FRI patients. Methods. This is a retrospective cohort study based on the FRI database of three Level 1 Trauma Centres. To be included, patients had to be at least 16 years of age and needed to be surgically treated for FRI between January 1. st. 2015 and September 1. st. 2020. Included patients were subdivided in either the NPWT group, or in the control group, when no NPWT had been applied. To avoid confounding, patients were excluded if they (also) underwent NPWT prior to the FRI diagnosis. The relation between the duration of NPWT during FRI treatment and the recurrence rate of infection was analyzed using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results. 99 patients were included in the NPWT group with a mean age of 51.4 ± 17.0 years. Most patients were male (n = 66). Tibia/fibula was the most common FRI location (n = 68). The median duration of NPWT was 18.0 (IQR 15.8) days. Overall, 28 patients (28.3%) developed a recurrent FRI. In the control group (n = 164), 19 patients (11.6%) developed a recurrent FRI (p = 0.001, 95% CI [0.174 – 0.635]). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the recurrence and non-recurrence category in NPWT group. The duration of NPWT was associated with a higher risk of re-infections (p = 0.013, OR 1.036, 95% CI [1.008 – 1.066]). Conclusion. The application of NPWT is associated with a two-and-a-half-fold increased risk of recurrence in patients with soft tissue defects due to FRI. Also, the duration of NWPT is an independent risk factor for recurrence. Therefore, NPWT should be used with caution in the treatment of orthopedic trauma patients with FRI. It is advised to consider its use only as a short-term necessity to bridge the period until definitive wound closure can be established and to keep this interval as short as possible

The use of a tourniquet when performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is subject to different methodologies. Some surgeons see no need to use a tourniquet, others use the tourniquet only during cementation, some utilise the tourniquet from prior to incision to after cementation, while others maintain throughout and release after closure. At our center, use of the tourniquet is part of the TKA routine: position the patient, administer antibiotics, inflate the tourniquet, note pressure and time, complete preparation and draping, set time-out, and cut. We release the tourniquet after cementation of components, prior to assessment of patellofemoral tracking and closure. Advantages of using a tourniquet are enhanced TKA durability, less blood during cementation, and reduced intra-operative blood loss and need for transfusion. Adequately preparing the bone surfaces and cleaning away blood and fat are essential to good cement technique, providing better interdigitation and penetration and resulting in fewer radiolucencies and longer survivorship. Lateral retinacular release, performed to alleviate patellar maltracking, is not a benign procedure and is associated with increased patellar complications including loosening, fracture, and avascular necrosis. Several articles, including one from our center, have studied the effect of tourniquet deflation and patellar tracking, observing 31% to 86% reduction in maltracking and indication for lateral release when assessing after deflation. A prospective study of 28 patients undergoing same day bilateral TKA using a tourniquet inflated prior to incision and released after cementation on one side and either no tourniquet or tourniquet only during cementation of the contralateral side found slightly lowered quadriceps strength in the tourniquet group that persisted for up to 3 months. However, another recent prospective study of 120 patients assessing wound closure in 90 degrees flexion versus full extension, with the combination of an inflated versus deflated tourniquet, found that closure of the knee in flexion after tourniquet deflation significantly decreased post-operative pain and promoted early recovery of ROM. Safe use of the tourniquet is essential to avoid neurologic injury, and includes pneumatic, wider, contoured cuffs, moderate maximum applied pressure, and monitoring during release for emboli and metabolite return. Operative efficiency minimises overall operative and tourniquet time, thereby reducing risk of complications. Several meta-analysis reviews have compared TKA performed with versus without use of a tourniquet. All found using a tourniquet resulted in a significant decrease in operative time and intra-operative blood loss, but a trend for increase in deep vein thrombosis and wound complications. Other meta-analysis articles have studied time of tourniquet release comparing early versus late. These studies unanimously found late release to be associated with substantial increase in post-operative complications. Some studies found early release before wound closure to be associated with increased total blood loss and greater drop in hemoglobin while the other studies reported no differences in these measures. Our practice is to deflate the tourniquet prior to wound closure and to achieve hemostatis. The use of a tourniquet to perform TKA facilitates efficient operative technique, improves visualization of anatomical structures, facilitates the surgeon's focus on proper component positioning, and facilitates good cement technique

Introduction. A longer operative time will lead to the development of any postoperative complications in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). According to previous reports, a significant increase in TKA procedure time done by novice surgeons was observed compared to high-volume surgeons. Our purpose was to investigate and to clarify the important maneuver necessary for novice surgeons to minimize a surgical time in TKA. Methods. A total of 300 knees in 248 patients, averaged 74.6 ± 8.7 years, were enrolled. All primary TKAs were done using same instruments (Balanced Knee System®, PS design, Ortho Development, Draper, UT) and same measured resection technique at 14 facilities by 25 orthopedic surgeons. Surgeons were divided into three surgeon groups (4 experts, 9 medium volume surgeons, 12 novices). All methods were approved by our institution's ethics committee. We divided the operative technique into 5 steps to make comparisons of step-by-step surgical time among surgeon groups of different levels. We defined Phase 1 as performing surgical exposure from skin incision to insertion of the intramedullary rod into the femur. Thereafter, the distal and AP surface of the femur, proximal tibia, the chamfer and PS box of the femur, and patella were resected in Phase 2. In Phase 3, a setup the trial component and a keel of the tibia were done after a confirmation of appropriate ligament balance using the spacer block. Then, a bone surface was irrigated with 2000ml of saline after the removal of the trial component. Subsequently, permanent components were fixed with use of bone cement in Phase 4. Finally, the final irrigation using 2000ml saline and wound closure were done in Phase 5. Every phase of the surgical time was recorded in each TKA. As a statistical analysis, operation data including length of skin incision, component size, operation time in each phase, and ratio of surgical time in each phase to whole surgical time, were compared using non-repeated measures of ANOVA and a post hoc Bonferroni correction. The threshold for statistical significance was set at a p value of less than 0.05. Results. A total of 62 TKAs were done by novice surgeons. On the other hand, medium volume surgeons and experts performed 119 and 119 TKAs, respectively. Gradually, differences among three groups became large phase by phase. Significant differences were detected among groups in each phase (Fig.1). Novice surgeons and medium volume surgeons took much time even in a basic technique including the exposure and wound closure (Fig.2). Regarding the ratio, no significant differences were detected among groups in Phase 2, 3, and 5. Experts and medium volume surgeons seemed to take caution in fixation of the permanent component. Interestingly, the ratio was still notably different among groups in Phase 1 (Fig.3). Conclusions. Significant differences among groups were seen in bone resection and implant fixation as well as in a basic technique including exposure and wound closure. Ratio was also notably different among groups in surgical exposure. Therefore, a basic technique would be important to reduce surgical time in novice surgeons in primary TKA