Adjuvant treatments including Betadine, Dakin's solution (sodium hypochlorite), or hydrogen peroxide (H O ) have been attempted to eradicate prosthetic joint infection caused by biofilm or intracellular bacteria. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the in vitro abilities of chemical adjuvants to decrease Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) biofilm presence on orthopaedic implant grade materials, including titanium, stainless steel, and cobalt chrome. S. aureus biofilms were grown for 48 h and evaluated for baseline colony forming units/centimeter squared (CFU/cm ) and compared to treatments with Betadine, Dakin's solution, H O , or 1% chlorine dioxide (ClO ). Control discs (n = 18) across all metals had an average of 4.2 × 10 CFU/cm . All treatments had statistically significant reductions in CFU/cm when compared to respective control discs (p < 0.05). For all metals combined, the most efficacious treatments were Betadine and H O , with an average 98% and 97% CFU/cm reduction, respectively. There were no significant differences between reductions seen with Betadine and H O , but both groups had statistically greater reductions than Dakin's solution and ClO . There was no change in antibiotic resistance patterns after treatment. Analysis of S. aureus biofilms demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in biofilm after a five-minute treatment with the modalities, with an average two log reduction in CFU/cm . Statement of clinical significance: While statistically significant reductions in CFU/cm were accomplished with chemical adjuvant treatments, the overall concentration of bacteria never fell below 10 CFU/cm , leading to questionable clinical significance. Further techniques to eradicate biofilm should be investigated. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 36:1599-1604, 2018.

Case A 66-year-old Caucasian man with Klippel-Trenaunay-Weber syndrome (KTWS) presented with chronic changes related to the KTWS, along with worsening pain and motion associated with residual damage from an episode of spontaneous septic arthritis that occurred 1 year prior. He underwent total joint arthroplasty with a rotating hinged knee implant. Conclusion Arthroplasty is a treatment option for patients with KTWS; however, there are risks that must be considered. This case report outlines the management of a patient with KTWS and a history of septic arthritis.

Local infiltration analgesia has become a mainstay of pain control for total knee arthroplasty. This study compared the efficacy and cost between periarticular injection cocktails containing liposomal bupivacaine vs ropivacaine. Two hundred forty-two primary total knee arthroplasties performed between September 2013 and January 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients received similar pre-operative medications and a periarticular injection. The control group received 300 mg of ropivacaine, while the study group received liposomal bupivacaine. All patients received the same preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative adjunct medications. Visual analog scale pain scores, narcotic requirements, distance walked, range of motion, length of stay, Knee Society Scores, and need for manipulation under anesthesia were recorded. Mean visual analog scale pain score 23 to 32 hours postoperatively, mean visual analog scale pain score during the entire hospitalization, and length of stay were lower in the ropivacaine group compared with the liposomal bupivacaine group. Knee range of motion was higher at 2 weeks in the ropivacaine group. There were no statistically significant differences in the other outcome measures. The cost of ropivacaine was considerably lower than the cost of liposomal bupivacaine. Bupivacaine added to liposomal bupivacaine addressed the delayed onset of this medication and gave an accurately matched comparison with the ropivacaine cocktail. All outcomes tested with liposomal bupivacaine were either equivalent or inferior to those with ropivacaine. When used as a component of a periarticular injection cocktail, liposomal bupivacaine offers no advantages over ropivacaine and has a considerably higher cost. [ Orthopedics . 2020; 43(2):91–96.]