Christoph Böhler1, Mirnic Dragana2, Stephan Puchner2, Reinhard Windhager2, Johannes Holinka2. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. christoph.boehler@meduniwien.ac.at. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic monarthritis of the knee. METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients who underwent surgery because of a bacterial monarthritis were evaluated. Patients were either treated with arthroscopy or with arthrotomy. Our primary outcome was the early recurrence of infection (>3 months after surgery), which made a second surgical procedure necessary. Furthermore, the influence of potential confounders on treatment outcome was analysed. RESULTS: Of the 70 patients, 41 were treated arthroscopically and 29 with arthrotomy. Eight patients (11.4 %) had to undergo a second surgical procedure because of early re-infection. The rate was significantly higher in patients treated with arthrotomy (n = 6; 20.7 %) compared with those treated by arthroscopy (n = 2) (p = 0.041). Range of motion was significantly better in patients who underwent arthroscopy (p < 0.001). Male sex had negative influence on the treatment success (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bacterial monarthritis of the knee who were treated with arthroscopy had a significantly lower re-infection rate and a better functional outcome than those treated with arthrotomy. As arthroscopy is the less invasive method, it should be considered the routine treatment, according to our data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic monarthritis of the knee. METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients who underwent surgery because of a bacterial monarthritis were evaluated. Patients were either treated with arthroscopy or with arthrotomy. Our primary outcome was the early recurrence of infection (>3 months after surgery), which made a second surgical procedure necessary. Furthermore, the influence of potential confounders on treatment outcome was analysed. RESULTS: Of the 70 patients, 41 were treated arthroscopically and 29 with arthrotomy. Eight patients (11.4 %) had to undergo a second surgical procedure because of early re-infection. The rate was significantly higher in patients treated with arthrotomy (n = 6; 20.7 %) compared with those treated by arthroscopy (n = 2) (p = 0.041). Range of motion was significantly better in patients who underwent arthroscopy (p < 0.001). Male sex had negative influence on the treatment success (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with bacterial monarthritis of the knee who were treated with arthroscopy had a significantly lower re-infection rate and a better functional outcome than those treated with arthrotomy. As arthroscopy is the less invasive method, it should be considered the routine treatment, according to our data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III.
Authors: G Coakley; C Mathews; M Field; A Jones; G Kingsley; D Walker; M Phillips; C Bradish; A McLachlan; R Mohammed; V Weston Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2006-07-06 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Mohammad R Rasouli; Camilo Restrepo; Mitchell G Maltenfort; James J Purtill; Javad Parvizi Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-09-17 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Seth Stake; Ryan Scully; Samuel Swenson; Danny Lee; Ryan Lee; Andrew Sparks; Rajeev Pandarinath Journal: J Clin Orthop Trauma Date: 2019-12-13
Authors: Daniel J Johnson; Bennet A Butler; Matthew J Hartwell; Claire E Fernandez; Richard W Nicolay; Ryan S Selley; Michael A Terry; Vehniah K Tjong Journal: J Orthop Date: 2019-11-27
Authors: David Jaffe; Timothy Costales; Julio J Jauregui; Scott Koenig; Tristan B Weir; Patrick Greenwell; Matthew Christian; R Frank Henn Journal: J Orthop Date: 2021-04-22