Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
730 result(s) for "Shoulder infection"
Sort by:
High Rates of Occult Infection after Shoulder Fracture Fixation: Considerations for Conversion Shoulder Arthroplasty
Background Existing hardware may contribute to increased risk of bacterial contamination and subsequent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in conversion shoulder arthroplasty performed for failed fracture fixation. Questions/Purposes This study examined the incidence of positive pre-operative aspiration and inflammatory marker data, along with correlation of pre-operative positive aspiration or inflammatory markers and subsequent infection following conversion shoulder arthroplasty for failed open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and the need for re-operation at 4.6-year follow-up. Methods Twenty-eight patients who underwent conversion to shoulder arthroplasty for any reason after fracture fixation were retrospectively reviewed in a single center. A pre-operative aspiration was done in 17 patients; all patients had intra-operative tissue sampling. All procedures were single-stage removal of hardware and performance of the arthroplasty. In cases of pre-operative positive bacterial growth, a single-stage procedure was performed according to the septic ENDO-Klinik protocol. Results In 4 of 17 pre-operative joint aspirations, bacterial growth was detected; one pre-operative negative aspiration demonstrated bacterial growth in intra-operative sampling. In three of them, the infection has been validated through intra-operatively results. Pre-operative aspiration showed a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 92% (p < 0.005) for infection. No post-operative PJIs were observed. Six revisions were performed, most commonly for aseptic loosening (two cases) and conversion of hemiarthroplasty to a reverse design (two cases). Conclusions In conclusion, the risk of low-grade shoulder infection after fracture osteosynthesis may be higher than in hip and knee joints, based on limited study data. Adequate pre-operative testing is recommended to rule out occult shoulder infection in this setting.
Two-stage shoulder arthroplasty after deep infection of the shoulder caused by arthroplasty, osteosynthesis or other surgical procedures: microbial spectrum, complications and functional outcome after at least 1 year follow-up
PurposeInfection represents probably the most challenging complication in shoulder arthroplasty and all other surgical procedures of the shoulder. A deep infection of the shoulder is often combined with a destruction of the joint and a loss of function. In many cases the arthroplasty is the last resort for these patients to obtain a satisfactory function. The objective of this study was to determine outcome data on microbiota and clinical results of a two-stage shoulder arthroplasty procedure after deep infection of the shoulder.MethodsTwenty-six patients with a deep shoulder infection after arthroplasty, osteosynthesis, or rotator-cuff repair were included, while two patients had an empyema without prior surgery. All underwent initial surgical debridement with implantation of an antibiotic-loaded spacer, followed by postoperative systemic antibiotics. The patients obtained definitive shoulder arthroplasty in a second surgery. None of the patients had to undergo more than two surgeries before the arthroplasty. The follow-up analysis including microbiota results, complication rates, and functional outcomes could be determined after at least 1 year in 60% of patients (n = 16).ResultsThe most frequently detected microorganisms were S. epidermidis (31%, n = 10) and Cutibacterium acnes (19%, n = 6). In 28% (n = 9) of cases multi-drug resistant bacteria were detected and in 35% (n = 8) of cases more than one microorganism was found. The overall revision rate was 42%, 11 of 26 patients, in the first 8 weeks after arthroplasty. Reasons for revision were joint dislocations in 23% (n = 6), 15% (n = 4) postoperative hematomas, one (4%) re-infection and one (4%) periprosthetic fracture. At follow-up after 19.3 ± 5.5 months postoperatively, a mean abduction of 113.4°, anteversion of 122.8° and external rotation of 14° was found, with an average age and gender-adjusted Constant Score of the affected shoulder of 63. The subjects’ pain and impairment in normal life measured by a questionnaire with school grades were significantly reduced (p < 0.05) as compared to prior shoulder arthroplasty.ConclusionThe most relevant bacteria in the study cohort were Staphylococcus subspecies and to a lower extent Cutibacterium acnes. A high number of multi-drug resistant and mixed microbiota spectra were detected, defining a need to adapt therapeutic regimen targeting these microbiotas. The two-stage shoulder arthroplasty after a deep infection resulted in excellent infection control with however high early postoperative rates for joint dislocation (23%) and hematomas (15%). At follow-up a stable joint was achieved with a sufficient functional outcome and satisfying outcome for activities of daily living and pain.Clinical trialTrial registration number: DRKS00016927, date of registration: 2019/03/19.
The role of serum C-reactive protein in the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection
IntroductionThere is a paucity of literature regarding serum C-reactive protein (CRP) in the evaluation of a shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The purpose of the current study was to establish cutoff values for diagnosing shoulder PJI and evaluate the influence of the type of infecting microorganism and the classification subgroups according to last proposed International Consensus Meeting (ICM) criteria on the CRP level.Materials and methodsA retrospective analysis of all 136 patients, who underwent septic or aseptic revision shoulder arthroplasty in our institution between January 2010 and December 2019, was performed. Shoulder PJI was defined according to the last proposed definition criteria of the ICM. Serum CRP levels were compared between infected and non-infected cases, between infection subgroups, as well as between different species of infecting microorganisms. A receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to display sensitivity and specificity of serum CRP level for shoulder PJI.ResultsA total of 52 patients (38%) were classified as infected, 18 meeting the criteria for definitive infection, 26 for probable infection and 8 for possible infection. According to the ROC curve, an optimized serum CRP threshold of 7.2 mg/l had a sensitivity of 69% and specificity of 74% (area under curve = 0.72). Patients with definitive infection group demonstrated significantly higher median serum CRP levels (24.3 mg/l), when compared to probable, possible infection groups and PJI unlikely group (8 mg/l, 8.3 mg/l, 3.6 mg/l, respectively, p < 0.05). The most common isolated microorganism was Cutibacterium acnes in 25 patients (48%) followed by coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) in 20 patients (39%). Patients with a PJI caused by high-virulent microorganisms had a significantly higher median serum CRP level compared to patients with PJI caused by low-virulent microorganisms (48 mg/l vs. 11.3 mg/l, p = 0.04).ConclusionsSerum CRP showed a low sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of shoulder PJI, even applying cutoffs optimized by receiver-operating curve analysis. Low-virulent microorganisms and patients with probable and possible infections are associated with lower CRP levels compared to patients with definitive infection and infections caused by high-virulent microorganisms.Level of evidenceDiagnostic Level III.
Corynebacterium periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review of 52 cases at 2.5 years follow-up
IntroductionWhile large progress has been achieved in identifying and treating the most common pathogens involved in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI), there remains limited knowledge on atypical pathogens such as Corynebacterium. For that reason, we analyzed infection and diagnostical characteristics, as well as treatment outcome in Corynebacterium PJI.MethodsA systematic review was performed based on a structured PubMed and Cochrane Library analysis using the PRISMA algorithm. The search was performed by 2 independent reviewers, and articles from 1960 to 2022 considered eligible for inclusion. Out of 370 search results, 12 studies were included for study synthesis.ResultsIn total, 52 cases of Corynebacterium PJI were identified (31 knees, 16 hips, 4 elbows, 1 shoulder). Mean age was 65 years, with 53% females, and a mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 3.9. The most common species was Corynebacterium striatum in 37 cases (71%). Most patients were treated with two-stage exchange (40%), isolated irrigation and debridement (21%), and resection arthroplasty (19%). Mean duration of antibiotic treatment was 8.5 weeks. At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, there were 18 reinfections (33%), and 39% were for Corynebacterium. Initial infection by Corynebacterium striatum species was predictive of reoperation (p = 0.035) and reinfection (p = 0.07).ConclusionCorynebacterium PJI affects multimorbid and elderly patients, with one in three developing a reinfection at short term. Importantly, the relative majority of reinfections was for persistent Corynebacterium PJI.
The role of serum D-Dimer for the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection
IntroductionD-Dimer was recently identified as an additional biomarker in the diagnosis of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Currently, there is only one study in literature dealing with the role of D-Dimer in the diagnosis of shoulder PJI. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to validate the sensitivity and specificity of D-Dimer in detecting shoulder PJI.Materials and methodsAll patients, who underwent septic or aseptic revision shoulder arthroplasty in our institution between November 2018 und March 2021, were analyzed. Our cohort consisted of 30 patients, of that 14 (47%) had a shoulder PJI according the last proposed criteria of the International Consensus Meeting. The diagnostic validity of serum D-Dimer regarding the detection of PJI was analyzed.ResultsThe mean D-Dimer level was significantly higher for the patients with shoulder PJI compared to patients with aseptic failure (1.44 ± 1 mg/l vs. 0.76 ± 0.6 mg/l, p = 0.025). Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most commonly isolated pathogens, in 9/14 patients (64%), followed by Cutibacterium acnes in 5/14 patients (36%). According to the ROC analysis, a serum D-Dimer threshold of 0.75 mg/l had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 56% for detection of a shoulder PJI. The area under curve was 0.74. A serum C-reactive protein (CRP) cutoff of 10 mg/l showed a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 88%. When both serum D-Dimer and CRP above the thresholds of 0.75 mg/l and 10 mg/l, respectively, were used to identify a PJI the sensitivity and specificity were 57% and 100%, respectively.ConclusionsSerum D-Dimer showed a good sensitivity but a poor specificity for the diagnosis of shoulder PJI. Combination D-Dimer and CRP led to improvement of the specificity, however, at the cost of sensitivity. Thus, combination of both methods may be used as a confirmatory test in the diagnosis of shoulder PJI but not to rule out infection.Level of evidenceDiagnostic level II.
The predictive value and reliability of ultrasound-guided synovial aspiration and biopsies for diagnosing periprosthetic shoulder infections
Introduction Preoperative diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infections (PSI) is difficult. Infections are mostly caused by low virulence bacteria and patients do not show typical signs of infection. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value and reliability of ultrasound-guided biopsies for cultures alone and in combination with multiplex polymerase chain reaction (mPCR), serum markers, and/or synovial markers for the preoperative diagnosis of PSI in patients undergoing revision shoulder surgery. Materials and methods A prospective explorative diagnostic cohort study was performed including 55 patients undergoing revision shoulder replacement surgery. A shoulder puncture was performed preoperatively before incision to collect synovial fluid for mPCR analysis and for measurement of interleukin-6, calprotectin, white blood cell count (WBC), and polymorphonuclear cells. Also prior to revision surgery, six ultrasound-guided synovial tissue biopsies were collected for culture and two for mPCR analysis. A blood sample was obtained to determine serum C-reactive protein, WBC, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Six routine care tissue biopsies were taken during revision surgery and served as reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV; the primary outcome measure), and accuracy were calculated for ultrasound-guided biopsies, blood and synovial markers, mPCR, and combinations thereof. Results Routine tissue cultures were positive for infection in 24 patients. Cultures from ultrasound-guided biopsies diagnosed infection in 7 of these patients, yielding a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of 29.2%, 93.5%, 77.8%, 63.0%, and 65.6%, respectively. The best diagnostic value was found for the combination of ultrasound-guided biopsies for culture, synovial WBC, and calprotectin with a sensitivity of 69.2%, specificity of 80.0%, PPV of 69.2%, and NPV of 80.0%. Conclusion Ultrasound-guided biopsies for cultures alone and in combination with mPCR, and/or blood and/or synovial markers are not reliable enough to use in clinical practice for the preoperative diagnosis of PSI. Level of evidence Diagnostic study level II.
One- vs. Two-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Shoulder Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI) remains a challenging complication after shoulder arthroplasty. Therapeutic options include one- or two-stage revision, irrigation and debridement, and resection arthroplasty. With our systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to compare one- and two-stage revisions for periprosthetic shoulder joint infections and determine the most appropriate therapeutic procedure. We performed an extensive literature search in PubMed, Ovid Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL and filtered out all relevant studies. The meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model, heterogeneity was analyzed using I2, and publication bias was assessed using the Egger’s test. A total of 8 studies with one-stage revisions, 36 studies with two-stage revisions, and 12 studies with both one-stage and two-stage revisions were included. According to the random-effects model, the reinfection rate for the entirety of the studies was 12.3% (95% Cl: 9.6–15.3), with a low-to-moderate heterogeneity of I2 = 47.72%. The reinfection rate of the one-stage revisions was 10.9%, which was significantly lower than the reinfection rate of the two-stage revisions, which was 12.93% (p = 0.0062). The one-stage revision rate was significantly lower with 1.16 vs. 2.25 revisions in the two-stage revision group (p < 0.0001). The postoperative functional outcome in one-stage-revised patients was comparable but not statistically significant (p = 0.1523). In one- and two-stage revisions, most infections were caused by Cutibacterium acnes. In summary, our systematic review and meta-analysis show the superiority of single-stage revision regarding reinfection and revision rates in periprosthetic shoulder joint infection.
Management of periprosthetic shoulder infections with the use of a permanent articulating antibiotic spacer
IntroductionManagement of periprosthetic shoulder infections (PSIs) still remains challenging. We conducted a retrospective case study to assess the outcomes of definitive articulating antibiotic spacer implantation in a cohort of elderly, low-demanding patients. We hypothesized that in patients with low functional demands seeking pain relief with chronic PSIs, treatment with a definitive articulating antibiotic spacer would lead to satisfying results concerning eradication of the infection, improvement of pain, and improving shoulder function.Materials and methods19 patients underwent definitive articulating antibiotic spacer implantation for the treatment of an infected shoulder arthroplasty. Mean age at surgery was 70.2 years. Patients were assessed pre-operatively with functional assessment including Constant-Murley score, and objective examination comprehending ROM, visual analog scale pain score, and patient subjective satisfaction (excellent, good, satisfied, or unsatisfied) score. Radiographs were taken to examine signs of loosening, and change in implant positioning.ResultsAt the most recent follow-up, none of the patients had clinical or radiographic signs suggesting recurrent infection. Most patients reported satisfying subjective and objective outcomes. Follow-up examination showed significant improvement of all variables compared to pre-operative values (p < 0.001). Radiographs did not show progressive radiolucent lines or change in the position of the functional spacer. In one case, glenoid osteolysis was reported, which did not affect the clinical outcome.ConclusionsIn selected elderly patients with low functional demands seeking pain relief with infected shoulder arthroplasty, definitive management with a cement spacer is a viable treatment option that helps in eradicating shoulder infection and brings satisfying subjective and objective outcomes.Level of EvidenceCase series, Level IV.
Serratia marcescens prosthetic joint infection: two case reports and a review of the literature
Background Despite some studies on Gram-negative bacteria as difficult to treat pathogens in periprosthetic joint infections, there are no detailed analyses on Serratia periprosthetic joint infections. As such, we present two cases of Serratia periprosthetic joint infections and summarize all known cases to date in the course of a PRISMA criteria-based systematic review. Case presentation Case 1: a 72-year-old Caucasian female with Parkinson’s disease and treated breast cancer developed periprosthetic joint infection caused by Serratia marcescens and Bacillus cereus , following multiple prior revisions for recurrent dislocations of her total hip arthroplasty. Two-stage exchange was performed, and the patient remained free of Serratia periprosthetic joint infection recurrence at 3 years. Case 2: an 82-year-old Caucasian female with diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease presented with a chronic parapatellar knee fistula after undergoing multiple failed infection treatments at external clinics. After performing two-stage exchange and gastrocnemius flap plastic for combined Serratia marcescens and Proteus mirabilis periprosthetic joint infection, the patient was released without any signs of infection, but was subsequently lost to follow-up. Review: a total of 12 additional Serratia periprosthetic joint infections were identified. Merged with our two cases, the mean age of 14 patients was 66 years and 75% were males. Mean length of antibiotic therapy was 10 weeks with ciprofloxacin most commonly used (50%). Mean follow-up was 23 months. There was a total of four reinfections (29%), including one case of Serratia reinfection (7%). Conclusions Serratia is a rare cause of periprosthetic joint infection affecting elderly with secondary diseases. While the overall reinfection rate was high, the risk of Serratia periprosthetic joint infection persistence was low. Treatment failure in patients may be attributable to the host, rather than the Serratia periprosthetic joint infection itself, thus challenging current concepts on Gram-negatives as a uniform class of difficult-to-treat pathogens. Level of evidence : Therapeutic level IV
Revision Surgery for Shoulder Infection after Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Functional Outcomes and Eradication Rate—A Systematic Review
The outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) have been reported to be successful. The incidence of deep infections (defined as an infection involving any part of the anatomy other than the skin and subcutaneous tissue) after surgery ranges between 0.03% and 3.4%. This systematic review aims to investigate the outcomes of revision surgery for infection following arthroscopic RCR. Clinical outcomes and eradication rates among patients treated with different surgical and antibiotic therapies are analyzed. A total of five studies were eligible for systematic review. A total of 146 patients were treated and evaluated, of whom 71 (48%) and 75 (52%) underwent arthroscopic and open surgery to manage the infection, respectively. The most common causative bacterium was Cutibacterium acnes (50.4%). Two studies reported the pre-and postoperative ASES score and Constant–Murley score (CMS), and a statistically significant improvement was found after surgery (p < 0.001 for both). Eradication was observed in a total of 138 patients (94.5%); no difference was found between arthroscopic and open revision surgery (92.8% and 96%, respectively, p = 0.90). The frequency-weighted mean duration of the intravenous antibiotic therapy was 6.6 ± 5.4 days, while the overall mean duration of antibiotic therapy, considering intravenous and oral administration, was 43.5 ± 40 days. Patients with infection following arthroscopic RCR undergoing revision surgery experienced a high rate of eradication. A significant improvement in shoulder functionality and less residual pain can be expected.