Positive Cultures Can Be Safely Ignored in Revision Arthroplasty Patients That Do Not Meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting Criteria

BackgroundDuring aseptic revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA), one or more cultures may occasionally isolate an organism. The hypothesis of this study was that in a portion of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic failure, culture may isolate an organism(s) that can be left untreated.MethodsAll patients undergoing revision TJA from 2000 to 2017 at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized as aseptic if they were appropriately investigated preoperatively and did not meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria. In the aseptic revision cohort, patients with a single positive culture or multiple cultures positive for different organisms (“organism-positive”) and patients who had negative intraoperative cultures (“organism-negative”) were compared based on demographics, comorbidities, operative details, subsequent reoperations, and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).ResultsIn total, 3,234 International Consensus Meeting–negative aseptic revision TJAs were included, of which 215 patients (6.6%) were organism-positive, 196 (91.2%) had a single positive culture, and 19 (8.8%) were positive for 2 or more distinct organisms (ie, polymicrobial). The most prevalent organisms were coagulase-negative Staphylococci (37.5%), Staphylococcus epidermidis (9.6%), and Cutibacterium acnes (8.0%). Demographics and operative details were comparable between the groups. Using multiple regressions there was no association between culture positivity and the rate of reoperation or PJI.ConclusionIsolation of organisms by culture in patients undergoing revision for aseptic failure was not uncommon. As long as these patients were appropriately investigated preoperatively and PJI was excluded, these findings suggest that culture results may be ignored without subjecting patients to additional antimicrobial treatment.     

The Fate and Relevance of the Patella in Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundIt remains unclear whether reimplantation of a patellar component during a two-stage revision for periprosthetic total knee arthroplasty infection (PJI) affects patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) or implant survivorship. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patellar resurfacing during reimplantation confers a functional benefit or increases implant survivorship after two-stage treatment for PJI.MethodsTwo-stage revisions for knee PJI performed by three surgeons at a single tertiary care center were reviewed retrospectively. All original patellar components and cement were removed during resection and the patella was resurfaced whenever feasible during reimplantation. PROMs, implant survivorship, and radiographic measurements (patellar tilt and displacement) were compared between knees reimplanted with a patellar component versus those without a patellar component.ResultsA total of 103 patients met the inclusion criteria. Forty-three patients (41.7%) underwent reimplantation with, and 60 patients (58.3%) without a patellar component. At a mean follow-up of 33.5 months, there were no significant differences in patient demographics or PROMs between groups (P ≥ .156). No significant differences were found in the estimated Kaplan-Meier all-cause, aseptic, or septic survivorship between groups (P ≥ .342) at a maximum of 75 months follow-up. There was no significant difference in the change (pre-resection to post-reimplant) of patellar tilt (P = .504) or displacement (P = .097) between the groups.ConclusionPatellar resurfacing during knee reimplantation does not appear to meaningfully impact postoperative PROMs or survivorship. Given the risk of potential extensor mechanism complications with patellar resurfacing, surgeons may choose to leave the patella without an implant during total knee reimplantation and expect similar clinical outcomes.Level of EvidenceLevel III.     

Intraoperative Practice Variability in Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundConsiderable practice variability exists among orthopedic surgeons performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study is to understand what TKA surgical and perioperative techniques are standard among high-volume academic knee arthroplasty surgeons.MethodsA written survey with 59 questions regarding management preferences in TKA was distributed by the 2018 John N. Insall Traveling Fellows to all arthroplasty-trained attending physicians at 13 medical centers, with 45 responses recorded.ResultsSurveyed surgeons performed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (88%) and bilateral TKA (87%). Most surveyed surgeons rarely or never performed outpatient primary TKA (71%). Conventional alignment guides and cemented implants were used by 80% of respondents. Most surgeons used posterior-stabilized implants (67%), followed by cruciate-retaining (20%), ultracongruent (20%), and medial congruent or medial pivot designs (17.8%). Surveyed surgeons frequently or always resurfaced the patella (73%), used a tourniquet for the entire case (73%), and used tranexamic acid for all TKAs (91%). The most common locations for intra-articular anesthetic injection were the arthrotomy (91%), the periosteum (84%), and the medial posterior capsule (82%). Saline (62%) and dilute iodine (47%) were the most common irrigation fluids. The arthrotomy was most commonly closed with running barbed suture (60%) followed by interrupted vicryl (40%). Skin closure was predominantly with running monocryl (60%) followed by staples (29%). Anticoagulation for TKA was primarily aspirin 81 mg BID (60%).ConclusionThere was considerable variability among surgeons polled although a strong preference for more conventional and less developmental techniques prevailed.     

不同规格怀牛膝不同极性部位HPLC指纹图谱

目的研究并比较不同规格怀牛膝不同极性部位的HPLC指纹图谱,探索其内部质量差异,为该药材的规格标准完善及临床用药提供参考。方法将怀牛膝用体积分数75%乙醇水浴回流提取,得体积分数75%乙醇回流提取物,用40 mL水溶解后,依次用石油醚、三氯甲烷、乙酸乙酯、正丁醇进行萃取,得到各萃取相及萃取后的水相,浓缩至浸膏,采集各部位HPLC指纹图谱;运用相似度、综合聚类法进行数据分析,同时对其不同部位的指纹图谱进行比对分析。结果石油醚、氯仿部位均标定了11个共有峰,乙酸乙酯部位标定了10个共有峰,正丁醇部位标定了19个共有峰,水部位标定8个共有峰;氯仿部位指纹图谱相似度差异较大,其他部位指纹图谱相似度差异较小,均在0.9以上;石油醚部位指纹图谱差异主要体现在峰高,乙酸乙酯部位、氯仿部位、水部位的化学成分种类及峰高均存在差异;综合聚类分析能将不同规格怀牛膝区分开。结论不同规格怀牛膝内部质量存在差异;实验中所建立的HPLC指纹图谱可以全面反映不同规格怀牛膝的化学成分分布,为不同规格怀牛膝的整体质量评价提供参考。     

Development and function of tissue resident macrophages in mice

Macrophages are important for tissue development, homeostasis as well as immune response upon injury or infection. For a long time they were only seen as one uniform group of phagocytes with a common origin and similar functions. However, this view has been challenged in the last decade and revealed a complex diversity of tissue resident macrophages. Here, we want to present the current view on macrophage development and tissue specification and we will discuss differences as well as common patterns between heterogeneous macrophage subpopulations.     

脊柱侧凸翻修手术

目的探讨脊柱侧凸手术失败原因及翻修手术的处理方法。方法回顾性分析我院自1997年以来收治的脊柱侧凸矫形术后需要进行翻修手术患者33例。男10例，女23例。翻修时距初次手术时间平均为13．4个月(0．5．66个月)。33例患者共行43次翻修手术，其中29例进行1次翻修手术，2例进行3次翻修手术，2例进行4次翻修手术。另有4例患者增加脊柱矫形和融合，同时行脊柱前路松解、支撑植骨手术。结果翻修手术时间平均3．9h(1．5—7．3h)，手术中平均出血601ml(50—2000ml)，平均输血量643．3mk(0-2000ml)。术后随访平均27个月(3—67个月)，未出现畸形加重、内固定失败等并发症。结论脊柱侧凸翻修手术是脊柱畸形矫形术后的一种补救手术。术前完善的手术策略和良好的手术技术是翻修手术的关键。     

强化膨胀式椎弓根螺钉翻修作用的生物力学评价

目的测试骨水泥强化膨胀式椎弓根螺钉(augmentation expansive pedicle screwfixa-tion with polymethyl methacrylate,AEPS),未强化的膨胀式椎弓根螺钉(expansive pedicle screw,EPS),CDH椎弓根螺钉翻修后的最大轴向拔出力,评价AEPS螺钉的翻修效应。方法24个新鲜小牛腰椎随机分成三组,AEPS组、EPS组、CDH组,每组8个椎体,三组椎体的椎弓根处均预先植入直径6.5mm CDH螺钉,拔出螺钉造成螺钉松动脱出的脊柱模型,然后分别植入AEPS、EPS、CDH螺钉,再次拔出螺钉,记录翻修后最大轴向拔出力。结果AEPS、EPS、CDH螺钉翻修后的最大拔出力分别为(2723.3±565.4)、(2216.3±475.6)和(1321.4±346.7)N,AEPS和EPS螺钉最大拔出力均显著高于CDH螺钉(P<0.05),AEPS轴向拔出力高于EPS螺钉,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论AEPS与EPS螺钉具有相当的翻修作用。