Periprosthetic joint infection: Current concept

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most devastating and costly complications following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Diagnosis and management of PJI is challenging for surgeons. There is no “gold standard” for diagnosis of PJI, making distinction between septic and aseptic failures difficult. Additionally, some of the greatest difficulties and controversies involve choosing the optimal method to treat the infected joint. Currently, there is significant debate as to the ideal treatment strategy for PJI, and this has led to considerable international variation in both surgical and nonsurgical management of PJI. In this review, we will discuss diagnosis and management of PJI following TJA and highlight some recent advances in this field.     

Correction: Seeking potent anti-tubercular agents: design and synthesis of substituted-N-(6-(4-(pyrazine-2-carbonyl)piperazine/homopiperazine-1-yl)pyridin-3-yl)benzamide derivatives as anti-tubercular agents

Correction for ‘Seeking potent anti-tubercular agents: design and synthesis of substituted-N-(6-(4-(pyrazine-2-carbonyl)piperazine/homopiperazine-1-yl)pyridin-3-yl)benzamide derivatives as anti-tubercular agents’ by Singireddi Srinivasarao et al., RSC Adv., 2020, 10, 12272–12288, DOI: 10.1039/D0RA01348J.

The authors regret that the name of one of the authors (Linda De Vooght) was shown incorrectly in the original article. The corrected author list is as shown above.The Royal Society of Chemistry apologises for these errors and any consequent inconvenience to authors and readers.     

Identifying and Addressing Preventable Process Errors in Trauma Care

Background

Management of the acute trauma patient is complex, with potential for error and adverse events. Avoidable injuries and deaths are not well understood. Analysis of error incidence, type, and severity can aid in greater understanding of the root causes and guide future development of error reduction strategies.

Methods

Weekly case review meetings for a UK trauma center were retrospectively reviewed over 1 year. Errors were identified and corroborated with case-note review by a reviewer blinded to any identified events. All events were classified according to the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organisations taxonomy and were typified as structural or process errors and omission or commission errors.

Results

A total of 1,752 major trauma patients were admitted over the study period, and 169 preventable errors were identified through analysis of case review meetings and case-note review. Clear patient harm was identified in 3.6 % of cases, with risk of harm in 30 %. Most errors occurred during the initial phase of care in the emergency department (51 %) and resulted most commonly in delays (56 %). The majority of errors were identified as process-related (88 %), with 62 % of them considered errors of omission.

Conclusions

This study reports error incidence in trauma and typifies them according to type and root cause. It identifies process errors and errors of omission in particular as the most common recurring events. Error theory suggests that protocols or checklists may most effectively address these errors. Further study should be prospective and may aid in the development of such interventions.     

Penile Incarceration with Metallic Foreign Bodies: Management and Review of Literature

Introduction

Penile strangulation from constricting metallic objects disorders is an uncommon urological emergency which requires prompt intervention to prevent complications. The treatment modalities are diverse and characterized by lack of consensus.

Material and Methods

Three cases with penile incarceration due to constricting metallic objects who presented to our department were included in this study. All 3 patients required different management options highlighting the diversity of clinical presentation and need for customization of treatment as per the clinical scenario.

Results

The 3 patients required different approach for treatment. First patient could be managed by degloving of penile skin while second patient required mechanical removal of the foreign body and debridement of local necrotic tissues. The third patient had to undergo excision of gangrenous penile skin and skin grafting.

Conclusion

The study emphasizes the diversity of clinical presentations and the need for employing different surgical techniques to achieve the desired results.Key Words: Penile strangulation, Constricting objects, Penile amputation